Cargando…
Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation?
In this commentary, we discuss ChatGPT and our perspectives on its utility to systematic reviews (SRs) through the appropriateness and applicability of its responses to SR related prompts. The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies leave many wondering about the current ca...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10148473/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37120563 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02243-z |
_version_ | 1785034982385778688 |
---|---|
author | Qureshi, Riaz Shaughnessy, Daniel Gill, Kayden A. R. Robinson, Karen A. Li, Tianjing Agai, Eitan |
author_facet | Qureshi, Riaz Shaughnessy, Daniel Gill, Kayden A. R. Robinson, Karen A. Li, Tianjing Agai, Eitan |
author_sort | Qureshi, Riaz |
collection | PubMed |
description | In this commentary, we discuss ChatGPT and our perspectives on its utility to systematic reviews (SRs) through the appropriateness and applicability of its responses to SR related prompts. The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies leave many wondering about the current capabilities, limitations, and opportunities for integration AI into scientific endeavors. Large language models (LLM)—such as ChatGPT, designed by OpenAI—have recently gained widespread attention with their ability to respond to various prompts in a natural-sounding way. Systematic reviews (SRs) utilize secondary data and often require many months and substantial financial resources to complete, making them attractive grounds for developing AI-assistive technologies. On February 6, 2023, PICO Portal developers hosted a webinar to explore ChatGPT’s responses to tasks related to SR methodology. Our experience from exploring the responses of ChatGPT suggest that while ChatGPT and LLMs show some promise for aiding in SR-related tasks, the technology is in its infancy and needs much development for such applications. Furthermore, we advise that great caution should be taken by non-content experts in using these tools due to much of the output appearing, at a high level, to be valid, while much is erroneous and in need of active vetting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02243-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10148473 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101484732023-04-30 Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? Qureshi, Riaz Shaughnessy, Daniel Gill, Kayden A. R. Robinson, Karen A. Li, Tianjing Agai, Eitan Syst Rev Commentary In this commentary, we discuss ChatGPT and our perspectives on its utility to systematic reviews (SRs) through the appropriateness and applicability of its responses to SR related prompts. The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies leave many wondering about the current capabilities, limitations, and opportunities for integration AI into scientific endeavors. Large language models (LLM)—such as ChatGPT, designed by OpenAI—have recently gained widespread attention with their ability to respond to various prompts in a natural-sounding way. Systematic reviews (SRs) utilize secondary data and often require many months and substantial financial resources to complete, making them attractive grounds for developing AI-assistive technologies. On February 6, 2023, PICO Portal developers hosted a webinar to explore ChatGPT’s responses to tasks related to SR methodology. Our experience from exploring the responses of ChatGPT suggest that while ChatGPT and LLMs show some promise for aiding in SR-related tasks, the technology is in its infancy and needs much development for such applications. Furthermore, we advise that great caution should be taken by non-content experts in using these tools due to much of the output appearing, at a high level, to be valid, while much is erroneous and in need of active vetting. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-023-02243-z. BioMed Central 2023-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10148473/ /pubmed/37120563 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02243-z Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Commentary Qureshi, Riaz Shaughnessy, Daniel Gill, Kayden A. R. Robinson, Karen A. Li, Tianjing Agai, Eitan Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
title | Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
title_full | Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
title_fullStr | Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
title_full_unstemmed | Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
title_short | Are ChatGPT and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
title_sort | are chatgpt and large language models “the answer” to bringing us closer to systematic review automation? |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10148473/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37120563 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-023-02243-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT qureshiriaz arechatgptandlargelanguagemodelstheanswertobringingusclosertosystematicreviewautomation AT shaughnessydaniel arechatgptandlargelanguagemodelstheanswertobringingusclosertosystematicreviewautomation AT gillkaydenar arechatgptandlargelanguagemodelstheanswertobringingusclosertosystematicreviewautomation AT robinsonkarena arechatgptandlargelanguagemodelstheanswertobringingusclosertosystematicreviewautomation AT litianjing arechatgptandlargelanguagemodelstheanswertobringingusclosertosystematicreviewautomation AT agaieitan arechatgptandlargelanguagemodelstheanswertobringingusclosertosystematicreviewautomation |