ReviewBlood research2025
Transforming hematological research documentation with large language models: an approach to scientific writing and data analysis.
Review in Blood research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Putting the I in AML: Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Cells · 2026Review
- Assessment of the efficacy of ChatGPT responses to bacterial species-specific questions in microbiology.Access microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT (OpenAI, CA, US), have revolutionized scientific writing and research processes across academic disciplines, providing comprehensive support throughout the entire research lifecycle. Generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools enhance every aspect of scientific writing, from hypothesis generation and methodology design to data analysis and manuscript preparation. This review examines the applications of LLMs in hematological research, with particular emphasis on advanced techniques, including prompt engineering and retrieval augmented generation (RAG) frameworks. Prompt engineering methods, including zero-shot and few-shot learning along with a chain-of-thought approach, enable researchers to generate more precise context-specific content, especially in scientific writing. Integrating RAG frameworks with the current medical literature and clinical guidelines significantly reduces the risk of misinformation while ensuring alignment with contemporary medical standards. Even though these GAI tools offer remarkable potential for streamlining research writing and enhancing documentation quality, the study also addresses the critical importance of maintaining scientific integrity, ethical considerations, and privacy concerns in hematological research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.