Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40594697›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Scalable evaluation framework for retrieval augmented generation in tobacco research using large Language models.

Sherif Elmitwalli, John Mehegan, Sophie Braznell, Allen Gallagher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sherif ElmitwalliTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK. se606@bath.ac.uk.
John MeheganTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Sophie BraznellTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Allen GallagherTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems show promise in specialized knowledge domains, but the tobacco research field lacks standardized assessment frameworks for comparing different large language models (LLMs). This gap impacts public health decisions that require accurate, domain-specific information retrieval from complex tobacco industry documentation. To develop and validate a tobacco domain-specific evaluation framework for assessing various LLMs in RAG systems that combines automated metrics with expert validation. Using a Goal-Question-Metric paradigm, we evaluated two distinct LLM architectures in RAG configurations: Mixtral 8 × 7B and Llama 3.1 70B. The framework incorporated automated assessments via GPT-4o alongside validation by three tobacco research specialists. A domain-specific dataset of 20 curated queries assessed model performance across nine metrics including accuracy, domain specificity, completeness, and clarity. Our framework successfully differentiated performance between models, with Mixtral 8 × 7B significantly outperformed Llama 3.1 70B in accuracy (8.8/10 vs. 7.55/10, p < 0.05) and domain specificity (8.65/10 vs. 7.6/10, p < 0.05). Case analysis revealed Mixtral's superior handling of industry-specific terminology and contextual relationships. Hyperparameter optimization further improved Mixtral's completeness from 7.1/10 to 7.9/10, demonstrating the framework's utility for model refinement. This study establishes a robust framework specifically for evaluating LLMs in tobacco research RAG systems, with demonstrated potential for extension to other specialized domains. The significant performance differences between models highlight the importance of domain-specific evaluation for public health applications. Future research should extend this framework to broader document corpora and additional LLMs, including commercial models.

Indexed as

Information Storage and RetrievalLanguageTobacco IndustryHumansLarge Language ModelsAI evaluationDomain-Specific information retrievalExpert validationGoal-Question-Metric frameworkLarge Language modelsRetrieval-Augmented generation

Identifiers

PMID40594697
PMCPMC12219056

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.