ArticleScientific reports2026
A pretrained biomedical large language model for Persian biomedical text mining.
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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.