Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41527010›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2026

Identification of biomedical entities from multiple repositories using a specialized metadata schema and search-augmented large language models.

Klaus Kaier, Felix Engel, Gita Benadi, Claudia Giuliani, Manuel Watter, Aref Kalantari, Karin Schuller, Claus-Werner Franzke, Markus Sperandio, Harald Binder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2026. 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

10 authors.

Klaus KaierInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. klaus.kaier@gmail.com.
Felix EngelInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Gita BenadiInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Claudia GiulianiInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Manuel WatterInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Aref KalantariInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Karin SchullerHelmholtz München, München, Germany.
Claus-Werner FranzkeInstitute for Infection Prevention and Control, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Markus SperandioInstitute of Cardiovascular Physiology and Pathophysiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany.
Harald BinderInstitute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Faculty and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMany biomedical articles reference multiple datasets across different public repositories, complicating accurate metadata capture and downstream re-use. Building on our prior grounded large language model (LLM) workflows for biomedical entity annotation, we extend the approach to identify and annotate all datasets referenced by a paper, even when distributed across repositories, by combining a specialized metadata schema with a three-step, search-augmented prompting strategy.

resultsIn the Transregional Collaborative Research Center PILOT (TRR 359 “Perinatal Development of Immune Cell Topology”), Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) releases are common alongside additional repository deposits. The applied approach reliably detected datasets referenced in articles and produced schema-compliant annotations using information available on the repository landing pages. After validation through structured face-to-face interviews with the article’s senior author, Gemini 2.5 Pro achieved higher precision (97.1%) than GPT-4.1 (81.9%, p < 0.001) and Claude Sonnet 4 (88.6%, p < 0.001). Limiting the annotation to the information available in the repositories achieved higher precision than adding information from the article (919% vs. 88.3% across all LLMs, p = 0.004). These results indicate that simple repository-grounded extraction enables high quality, multi-dataset metadata annotation which has the potential to minimize the time and effort required for manual metadata annotation.

Indexed as

Data CurationData MiningLarge Language ModelsMetadataBiocurationDatabases, GeneticHumans

Identifiers

PMID41527010
PMCPMC12837611

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.