ReviewBioinformatics advances2026
Empowering biological knowledgebases: advances in human-in-the-loop AI-driven literature curation.
Review in Bioinformatics advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological knowledgebases facilitate discovery across the life sciences by structuring experimental findings into human-readable and computable formats. These essential resources are maintained by a small number of professional biocurators worldwide and face combined chronic underfunding and the exponential growth of the literature. In this perspective, we review how artificial intelligence, particularly large language models and agentic systems, can augment literature-curation workflows. Applications include literature recommendation, entity recognition, data extraction, summarization, ontology development, and quality control with emphasis on published use cases at Global Core BioData Resources and ELIXIR Core Data Resources. We identify key challenges, including the scarcity of training data, difficulty in extracting complex relationships, and concerns about error propagation. To address these challenges, we propose a human-in-the-loop framework where generative artificial intelligence approaches accelerate routine tasks while curators provide critical evaluation and domain expertise. We also propose practical recommendations for the community, including the creation of shared benchmark datasets, harmonized evaluation frameworks, and best-practice guidelines for transparent human-in-the-loop AI deployment in biocuration. These synergistic partnerships will be critical to ensure biological rigour, accelerating knowledge integration while maintaining the quality essential for trusted biological resources.
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.