SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Accuracy of LLMs to retrieve numeric data for meta-analysis in dentistry
13 references·0 citing·43 second hopsampled
Accuracy of LLMs to retrieve numeric data for meta-analysis in dentistry (2025)Accuracy of LLMs to retrieve numeric data…The Need to Improve the Medical Subject Headings ( MeSH ) and the Excerpta Medica Tree ( EMTREE ) Thesauri to Perform Systematic Review on Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders (2025)The Need to Improve the Medic…Large language models for the screening step in systematic reviews in dentistry (2025)Large language models for the…Potential Roles of Large Language Models in the Production of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (2024)Potential Roles of Large Lang…Performance of two large language models for data extraction in evidence synthesis (2024)Performance of two large lang…Data extraction for evidence synthesis using a large language model: A proof‐of‐concept study (2024)Data extraction for evidence …Can large language models replace humans in systematic reviews? Evaluating GPT ‐4's efficacy in screening and extracting data from peer‐reviewed and grey literature in multiple languages (2024)Can large language models rep…Artificial Intelligence to Automate Network Meta-Analyses: Four Case Studies to Evaluate the Potential Application of Large Language Models (2024)Artificial Intelligence to Au…Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT for Automating Systematic Review Process: Methodology, Case Study, Limitations, and Future Directions (2023)Harnessing the Power of ChatG…The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an…Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review (2017)Frequency of data extraction …Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry (2017)Analysis of the time and work…How to conduct systematic reviews more expeditiously? (2015)How to conduct systematic rev…Automating data extraction in systematic reviews: a systematic review (2015)Automating data extraction in…Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement (1996)The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews (2003)Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative (2003)SWIFT-Review: a text-mining workbench for systematic review (2016)Number of Response Options, Reliability, Validity, and Potential Bias in the Use of the Likert Scale Education and Social Science Research: A Literature Review (2022)Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? (1998)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies (2009)Delphi consensus reached to produce a decision tool for SelecTing Approaches for Rapid Reviews (STARR) (2019)Using rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems and progress towards universal health coverage (2019)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Interrater Reliability in Systematic Review Methodology: Exploring Variation in Coder Decision-Making (2018)A full systematic review was completed in 2 weeks using automation tools: a case study (2020)Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews (2010)Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews (2015)The Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers' manual 2015: methodology for JBI scoping reviews (2015)Musculoskeletal pain and sedentary behaviour in occupational and non-occupational settings: a systematic review with meta-analysis (2021)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Global prevalence and burden of depressive and anxiety disorders in 204 countries and territories in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic (2021)PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews (2021)PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews (2021)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement (2010)Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic review (2017)ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, SciSpace and Wolfram versus higher education assessments: an updated multi-institutional study of the academic integrity impacts of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) on assessment, teaching and learning in engineering (2024)Evaluating the effectiveness of large language models in abstract screening: a comparative analysis (2024)The emergence of large language models as tools in literature reviews: a large language model-assisted systematic review (2025)Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews (2013)Toward systematic review automation: a practical guide to using machine learning tools in research synthesis (2019)Generative artificial intelligence use in evidence synthesis: A systematic review (2025)Large language models for conducting systematic reviews: on the rise, but not yet ready for use—a scoping review (2025)Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic (2012)Summarizing systematic reviews (2015)Transforming literature screening: The emerging role of large language models in systematic reviews (2025)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)Accelerating clinical evidence synthesis with large language models (2025)Can generative AI reliably synthesise literature? exploring hallucination issues in ChatGPT (2025)High-performance automated abstract screening with large language model ensembles (2025)Collaborative large language models for automated data extraction in living systematic reviews (2025)Language models for data extraction and risk of bias assessment in complementary medicine (2025)
this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

  • 2021The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews107,380 cited
  • 2017Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry733 cited
  • 2015Automating data extraction in systematic reviews: a systematic review286 cited
  • 2024Can large language models replace humans in systematic reviews? Evaluating GPT ‐4's efficacy in screening and extracting data from peer‐reviewed and grey literature in multiple languages266 cited
  • 2017Frequency of data extraction errors and methods to increase data extraction quality: a methodological review229 cited
  • 2023Harnessing the Power of ChatGPT for Automating Systematic Review Process: Methodology, Case Study, Limitations, and Future Directions201 cited
  • 2024Data extraction for evidence synthesis using a large language model: A proof‐of‐concept study172 cited
  • 2015How to conduct systematic reviews more expeditiously?104 cited
  • 2024Performance of two large language models for data extraction in evidence synthesis79 cited
  • 2024Potential Roles of Large Language Models in the Production of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses76 cited
  • 2024Artificial Intelligence to Automate Network Meta-Analyses: Four Case Studies to Evaluate the Potential Application of Large Language Models71 cited
  • 2025The Need to Improve the Medical Subject Headings ( MeSH ) and the Excerpta Medica Tree ( EMTREE ) Thesauri to Perform Systematic Review on Oral Potentially Malignant Disorders10 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

  • 2025Large language models for the screening step in systematic reviews in dentistry8 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.