Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41487275›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

Development and validation of a multi-agent AI pipeline for automated credibility assessment of tobacco misinformation: a proof-of-concept study.

Sherif Elmitwalli, John Mehegan, Sophie Braznell, Allen Gallagher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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, United Kingdom.
John MeheganTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom.
Sophie BraznellTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom.
Allen GallagherTobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The proliferation of tobacco-related misinformation poses significant public health risks, requiring scalable solutions for credibility assessment. Traditional manual fact-checking approaches are resource-intensive and cannot match the pace of misinformation spread. Objective: To develop and validate a proof-of-concept multi-agent AI pipeline for automated credibility assessment of tobacco misinformation claims, evaluating its performance against expert human reviewers. Methods: We constructed a three-agent pipeline using OpenAI GPT-4.1 and the Crewai framework. The Serper API provided real-time evidence retrieval. The Content Analyzer classifies claims into four types: health impact, scientific assertion, policy, or statistical. The Scientific Fact Verifier queries authoritative sources (WHO, CDC, PubMed Central, Cochrane). The Health Evidence Assessor applies weighted scoring across five dimensions to assign 0-100 credibility scores on a five-level scale. Results: The framework achieved an MAE of 6.25 points against expert scores, a weighted Cohen's Limitations: We validated our approach using 20 diverse tobacco claims through intensive expert review (2-4 h per claim). The system exhibited a conservative bias (+3.25 points, Conclusion: Our proof-of-concept agentic AI pipeline demonstrates substantial agreement with expert assessments of tobacco-related claims while providing dramatic speed improvements. By combining zero-shot LLM reasoning, retrieval-grounded evidence verification, and a transparent five-level scoring schema, the system offers a practical tool for real-time misinformation monitoring in public health. This proof-of-concept establishes technical feasibility for automated tobacco misinformation assessment, with validation results supporting further development and larger-scale testing before operational deployment.

Indexed as

automated fact-checkingcredibility assessmentexpert validationlarge language modelsmulti-agent AI pipelinepublic health informaticsretrieval-augmented generationtobacco misinformation

Identifiers

PMID41487275
PMCPMC12757325

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.