Scholarlink

<p>Abstracts of surgical randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely read but often omit key methodological details despite CONSORT guidance. We evaluated whether a tightly constrained large language model (LLM) pipeline could improve completeness and readability at scale. We conducted a three-phase in silico study of consecutive surgical RCTs indexed in PubMed (2005–2025) with open-access full texts in PubMed Central. A 14-item CONSORT-derived rubric (maximum 25 points) was developed and validated against expert scoring, demonstrating good agreement (concordance correlation coefficient 0.71, 95% CI 0.44–0.86) and high reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.91, 95% CI 0.80–0.96). An automated pipeline using GPT-4o (OpenAI) generated rewritten abstracts from full texts under strict non-fabrication constraints. Among 651 RCTs, original abstracts showed low completeness (mean 9.06/25, 95% CI 8.58–9.53). Rewriting significantly improved completeness (mean increase 7.40 for 250-word and 8.06 for 300-word versions; both <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001), with gains across all CONSORT domains, particularly randomisation, harms, and trial registration. Readability improved slightly and correlated with completeness. A constrained LLM pipeline can substantially enhance the completeness of surgical RCT abstracts at scale, with potential applications in authoring, peer review, and editorial workflows, provided appropriate human oversight.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Feasibility and impact of a large language model pipeline for surgical trial abstracts

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月26日

查看全文
  • Obafunsho John Abiola,
  • Dmitri Nepogodiev,
  • James Glasbey,
  • Omar Omar,
  • Cortland Linder,
  • Virginia Ledda,
  • Aneel Bhangu

摘要

Abstracts of surgical randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are widely read but often omit key methodological details despite CONSORT guidance. We evaluated whether a tightly constrained large language model (LLM) pipeline could improve completeness and readability at scale. We conducted a three-phase in silico study of consecutive surgical RCTs indexed in PubMed (2005–2025) with open-access full texts in PubMed Central. A 14-item CONSORT-derived rubric (maximum 25 points) was developed and validated against expert scoring, demonstrating good agreement (concordance correlation coefficient 0.71, 95% CI 0.44–0.86) and high reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.91, 95% CI 0.80–0.96). An automated pipeline using GPT-4o (OpenAI) generated rewritten abstracts from full texts under strict non-fabrication constraints. Among 651 RCTs, original abstracts showed low completeness (mean 9.06/25, 95% CI 8.58–9.53). Rewriting significantly improved completeness (mean increase 7.40 for 250-word and 8.06 for 300-word versions; both p < 0.0001), with gains across all CONSORT domains, particularly randomisation, harms, and trial registration. Readability improved slightly and correlated with completeness. A constrained LLM pipeline can substantially enhance the completeness of surgical RCT abstracts at scale, with potential applications in authoring, peer review, and editorial workflows, provided appropriate human oversight.