SynthesisJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
The potential of large language models in the field of infertility: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeLarge language models have demonstrated significant potential across a wide range of medical fields and may potentially induce a transformation in the field of infertility and sterility. This systematic review aims to synthesize existing research and explore the current strengths and limitations of large language models in the field of infertility and sterility.
methodsResearchers conducted a comprehensive search across three databases and employed a thematic synthesis approach for data analysis.
resultsThe analysis included a total of 13 studies. Large language models exhibited advantages in the accuracy and reproducibility of information output and consultation, demonstrated robust learning capabilities, and were able to provide satisfactory recommendations to patients. However, there were significant variations in the performance of different large language models, and the readability of the output information was poor, making it difficult to provide comprehensive answers.
conclusionIn the domain of infertility, large language models have not yet achieved full reliability and should be regarded solely as information sources whose outputs require careful verification; they are presently incapable of substituting for clinical diagnosis. Their development requires increased investment in relevant technologies and the use of authoritative, accurate information to unlock their potential in this field and other medical areas.
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.