Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41626895›Full record

ArticleResearch synthesis methods2026

Automating the data extraction process for systematic reviews using GPT-4o and o3.

Yuki Kataoka, Tomohiro Takayama, Keisuke Yoshimura, Ryuhei So, Yasushi Tsujimoto, Yosuke Yamagishi, Shiro Takagi, Yuki Furukawa, Masatsugu Sakata, Đorđe Bašić and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research synthesis methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

20 authors.

Yuki KataokaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Kyoto Min-iren Asukai Hospital, Kyoto, Japan.
Tomohiro TakayamaFaculty of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Keisuke YoshimuraFaculty of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3985-2197
Ryuhei SoScientific Research WorkS Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG), Osaka, Japan.
Yasushi TsujimotoScientific Research WorkS Peer Support Group (SRWS-PSG), Osaka, Japan.
Yosuke YamagishiDivision of Radiology and Biomedical Engineering, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Shiro TakagiIndependent Researcher.
Yuki FurukawaDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Masatsugu SakataDepartment of Health Promotion and Human Behavior, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine/School of Public Health, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.
Đorđe BašićFaculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Clinical Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Andrea CiprianiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Eirini KaryotakiDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mathias HarrerDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Stefan LeuchtSection for Evidence-Based Medicine in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Ava HomiarDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Edoardo G OstinelliDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Clara MiguelDepartment of Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology, WHO Collaborating Center for Research and Dissemination of Psychological Interventions, Amsterdam Public Health Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alessandro RodolicoSection for Evidence-Based Medicine in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Toshi A FurukawaKyoto University Office of Institutional Advancement and Communications, Kyoto, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 22K15664
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models have shown promise for automating data extraction (DE) in systematic reviews (SRs), but most existing approaches require manual interaction. We developed an open-source system using GPT-4o to automatically extract data with no human intervention during the extraction process. We developed the system on a dataset of 290 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from a published SR about cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. We evaluated the system on two other datasets: 5 RCTs from an updated search for the same review and 10 RCTs used in a separate published study that had also evaluated automated DE. We developed the best approach across all variables in the development dataset using GPT-4o. The performance in the updated-search dataset using o3 was 74.9% sensitivity, 76.7% specificity, 75.7 precision, 93.5% variable detection comprehensiveness, and 75.3% accuracy. In both datasets, accuracy was higher for string variables (e.g., country, study design, drug names, and outcome definitions) compared with numeric variables. In the third external validation dataset, GPT-4o showed a lower performance with a mean accuracy of 84.4% compared with the previous study. However, by adjusting our DE method, while maintaining the same prompting technique, we achieved a mean accuracy of 96.3%, which was comparable to the previous manual extraction study. Our system shows potential for assisting the DE of string variables alongside a human reviewer. However, it cannot yet replace humans for numeric DE. Further evaluation across diverse review contexts is needed to establish broader applicability.

Indexed as

Generative Artificial IntelligenceInformation Storage and RetrievalSystematic Reviews as TopicAutomationHumansLarge Language ModelsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificitySoftwaredata extraction automationGPT-4olarge language modelso3systematic reviews

Identifiers

PMID41626895
PMCPMC12823200

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.