Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42286057›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

A pretrained biomedical large language model for Persian biomedical text mining.

Baqer M Merzah, Tania Taami, Salman Asoudeh, Saeed Mirzaee, Amir Reza Hossein Pour, Amir Ali Bengari, Ehsan Karimi Shahmarvandi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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

7 authors.

Baqer M MerzahDepartment of Computer Science, Faculty of Education, University of Kufa, Najaf, Iraq.
Tania TaamiDepartment of Computer Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA.
Salman AsoudehDepartment of Computer Engineering, Velayat University, Iranshahr, Iran.
Saeed MirzaeeDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
Amir Reza Hossein PourDepartment of Computer Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
Amir Ali BengariDepartment of Industrial and Technology Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. amirali.bengari@ut.ac.ir.
Ehsan Karimi ShahmarvandiUniversity of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have recently gained attention in the life sciences due to their capacity to model, extract, and apply complex biological information. Beyond their classical use as chatbots, these systems are increasingly used for complex analysis and problem-solving in specialized fields, including bioinformatics. First, we introduce BIOPARS-BENCH, a dataset from over 10,000 scientific articles, textbooks, and medical websites. BioParsQA was also introduced to evaluate the proposed model, which consists of 5231 Persian medical questions and answers. This study then introduces BioPars, a simple but accurate measure designed to assess LLMs for three main abilities: acquiring subject-specific knowledge, interpreting and synthesizing such knowledge, and demonstrating proper evidence. Comparing ChatGPT, Llama, and Galactica, our study highlights their ability to remember and retrieve learned knowledge but also reveals shortcomings in addressing higher-level, real-world questions and fine-grained inferences. These findings indicate the need for further fine-tuning to address the capabilities of LLM in bioinformatics tasks. To our knowledge, BioPars is the first application of LLM in Persian medical QA, especially for generating long answers. Evaluation of four selected medical QA datasets shows that BioPars has achieved remarkable results compared to comparative approaches. The model on BioParsQA achieved a ROUGE-L score of 29.99, which is an improvement over GPT-4 1.0. The model achieved a BERTScore of 90.87 with the MMR method. The MoverScore and BLEURT values were also higher in this model than the other three models. In addition, the reported scores for the model are MoverScore = 60.43 and BLEURT = 50.78.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyData MiningLarge Language ModelsHumansIranBenchmarking LLMsBioinformatics evaluationBiomedical language modelsData-driven knowledge extractionLife sciences applications

Identifiers

PMID42286057
PMCPMC13518823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.