ArticleBriefings in bioinformatics2026
Benchmarking large language models for pathogen-disease classification in post-acute infection syndromes.
Article in Briefings in bioinformatics, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Post-Acute Infection Syndromes (PAIS) are medical conditions that persist following acute infections from pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2, Epstein-Barr virus, and Influenza virus. Despite growing global awareness of PAIS and the exponential increase in biomedical literature, only a small fraction of this literature pertains specifically to PAIS, making the identification of pathogen-disease associations within such a vast, heterogeneous, and unstructured corpus a significant challenge for researchers. This study evaluated the effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) in extracting these associations through a binary classification task using a curated dataset of 1000 manually labeled PubMed abstracts. We benchmarked a wide range of open-source LLMs of varying sizes (4B-70B parameters), including generalist, reasoning, and biomedical-specific models. We also investigated the extent to which prompting strategies such as zero-shot, few-shot, and Chain of Thought (CoT) methods can improve classification performance. Our results indicate that model performance varied by size, architecture, and prompting strategy. Zero-shot prompting produced the most reliable results: Mistral-Small-Instruct-2409 and Llama-3.1-Nemotron-70B-Instruct achieved balanced accuracy scores of 0.81 and 0.80, respectively, along with macro-F1 scores of up to 0.80, while maintaining minimal invalid outputs. While few-shot and CoT prompting often degraded performance in generalist models, reasoning models such as DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama-70B and QwQ-32B demonstrated improved accuracy and consistency when provided with additional context.
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.