ArticlePloS one2026
MetaMind: A multi-agent transformer-driven framework for automated network meta-analyses.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
backgroundNetwork meta-analysis (NMA) can compare several interventions at once by combining head-to-head and indirect trial evidence. However, identifying, extracting, and modelling these often takes months, delaying updates in many therapeutic areas.
objectiveTo develop and validate MetaMind, an end-to-end, transformer-driven framework that automates NMA processes-including study retrieval, structured data extraction, and meta-analysis execution-while minimizing human input.
methodsMetaMind integrates Promptriever, a fine-tuned retrieval model, to semantically retrieve high-impact clinical trials from PubMed; a multi-agent LLM architecture--Mixture of Agents (MoA)-- pipeline to extract PICO-structured (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) endpoints; and GPT-4o-generated Python and R scripts to perform Bayesian random-effects NMA and other NMA designs within a unified workflow. Validation was conducted by comparing MetaMind's outputs against manually performed NMAs in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD).
resultsPromptriever outperformed baseline SentenceTransformer with higher similarity scores (0.7403 vs. 0.7049 for UC; 0.7142 vs. 0.7049 for CD) and narrower relevance ranges. Promptriever performance achieved 82.1% recall, 91.1% precision and an F1 score of 86.4% when compared to a previously published NMA. MetaMind achieved 100% accuracy on a limited set of remission endpoints regarding PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) element extraction and produced comparative effect estimates and credible intervals closely matching manual analyses.
conclusionsIn our validation studies, MetaMind reduced the end-to-end NMA process to less than a week, compared with the several months typically needed for manual workflows, while preserving statistical rigor. This suggests its potential for future scaling of evidence synthesis to additional therapeutic 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.