ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Evaluating a customised large language model (DELSTAR) and its ability to address medication-related questions associated with delirium: a quantitative exploratory study.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-generated patient information leaflets for oral anticoagulants: quality, usability, readability, and reproducibility compared with FDA-referenced materials.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Evaluation of large language models in supporting autoimmune liver disease diagnosis and clinical decision-making: advantages of reasoning-based models.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2026Article
- Article
- Prompt injection of OpenAI custom GPTs leaks informatics secrets.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA customised large language model (LLM) could serve as a next-generation clinical pharmacy research assistant to prevent medication-associated delirium. Comprehensive evaluation strategies are still missing.
aimThis quantitative exploratory study aimed to develop an approach to comprehensively assess the domain-specific customised delirium LLM (DELSTAR) ability, quality and performance to accurately address complex clinical and practice research questions on delirium that typically require extensive literature searches and meta-analyses.
methodDELSTAR, focused on delirium-associated medications, was implemented as a 'Custom GPT' for quality assessment and as a Python-based software pipeline for performance testing on closed and leading open models. Quality metrics included statement accuracy and data credibility; performance metrics covered F1-Score, sensitivity/specificity, precision, AUC, and AUC-ROC curves.
resultsDELSTAR demonstrated more accurate and comprehensive information compared to information retrieved by traditional systematic literature reviews (SLRs) (p < 0.05) and accessed Application Programmer Interfaces (API), private databases, and high-quality sources despite mainly relying on less reliable internet sources. GPT-3.5 and GPT-4o emerged as the most reliable foundation models. In Dataset 2, GPT-4o (F1-Score: 0.687) and Llama3-70b (F1-Score: 0.655) performed best, while in Dataset 3, GPT-3.5 (F1-Score: 0.708) and GPT-4o (F1-Score: 0.665) led. None consistently met desired threshold values across all metrics.
conclusionDELSTAR demonstrated potential as a clinical pharmacy research assistant, surpassing traditional SLRs in quality. Improvements are needed in high-quality data use, citation, and performance optimisation. GPT-4o, GPT-3.5, and Llama3-70b were the most suitable foundation models, but fine-tuning DELSTAR is essential to enhance sensitivity, especially critical in pharmaceutical contexts.
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.