ArticlePloS one2026
AI-assisted thematic synthesis of existing neurological core outcome sets: A descriptive reference framework (COS-Neuro).
Article in PloS one, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeurological disorders affect approximately 3 billion people globally, yet clinical trial success is often hindered by poorly selected outcome measures, impacting trial design, compliance, and interpretation. Over the past 25 years, Core Outcome Sets (COS) have emerged as standardized tools to enhance outcome selection, ensuring comparability across studies and reflecting the priorities of both researchers and patients. Despite the success of COS initiatives in other fields, their development in neurology remains limited, leaving many trialists without disease-specific guidance.
objectivesThis study aimed to conduct an AI-assisted thematic synthesis of outcome domains from existing COS, with the goal of identifying structural patterns common to these sets and generating descriptive reference framework to inform future COS development.
methodsCOS-Neuro was developed using AI-assisted thematic framework analysis, complemented by expert review. A modified five-step thematic analysis was conducted without pre-determined codes: 1. Dataset Gathering - Data was collected from the COMET database, and COS domains for neurological disorders were coded. 2. Prompt Design & Testing - Large language models (LLMs), including ChatGPT 3.5, Google Gemini 1.5 Flash and Meta Llama-2-70b, were trialled, and prompts refined based on their outputs. 3. Thematic Analysis - LLMs categorised domains into core areas. 4. Human Refinement - Experts reviewed LLM-generated core areas and selected those most appropriate for further interpretation. 5. Clinical Validation - Experts validated the domains, core areas, and concepts. This approach integrated AI with expert oversight to develop an AI-descriptive thematic map of existing neurological COS.
resultsUtilising LLMs, particularly ChatGPT, an AI-assisted conceptual framework synthesising existing neurological COS was developed based on the analysis of 112 published COS. Through adaptation of the OMERACT model, the final framework comprised four overarching concepts, 13 core areas, and 75 domains identified through expert consensus.
conclusionCOS-Neuro provides a preliminary AI-assisted descriptive synthesis of existing neurological COS, organised using the OMERACT Filter 2.1 as a structural reference. This hypothesis-generating framework may serve as a foundational resource for future COS research and trial design, particularly in areas where no disease-specific COS exists. However, it requires prospective validation through disease-specific, multi-stakeholder consensus processes before clinical application. COS-Neuro also demonstrates the feasibility of AI-assisted thematic synthesis in this context and warrants evaluation in other specialties.
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.