Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41983809›Full record

ReviewEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2026

Utilizing Artificial Intelligence to create narrative literature reviews.

Auro Del Giglio, Mateus Uérlei Pereira da Costa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Auro Del GiglioCentro Universitário FMABC, Santo André, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2009-824X
Mateus Uérlei Pereira da CostaSociedade Brasileira de Oncologia Clínica, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1570-3967

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores the potential impact of Artificial Intelligence on narrative literature reviews in academic research. The literature review process involves finding, analyzing, and synthesizing relevant literature and is crucial for situating new research within existing knowledge. The integration of Artificial Intelligence tools, specifically Large Language Models such as the Generative Pre-Trained Transformer series, can significantly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of this process. This paper outlines the steps involved in conducting a literature review and examines how Artificial Intelligence tools can aid in identifying research gaps, organizing and analyzing retrieved articles, and writing the review. In the literature review process, we provide examples of both free and commercially available Artificial Intelligence software to demonstrate their potential applications.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceReview Literature as TopicGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansLarge Language Models

Identifiers

PMID41983809
PMCPMC13128250

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.