ArticleJAMIA open2026
DataAtlas: automatic generation of data dictionaries using large language models.
Article in JAMIA open, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Reuse of shared datasets is often limited by incomplete or inconsistent documentation, hindering interpretation and secondary analysis. We developed DataAtlas, an open-source system for automated generation of data dictionaries from tabular datasets. Materials and Methods: DataAtlas combines deterministic structural profiling with large language model (LLM)-based semantic inference to generate human-readable descriptions of datasets, tables, and variables. The system integrates column metadata, statistical summaries, and representative sample values to produce concise, context-aware descriptions. We evaluated the approach on 3 heterogeneous clinical datasets using structural validation, blinded LLM-based comparison with official documentation, human expert review, and downstream task evaluation. Results: Generated descriptions were frequently preferred over official documentation, particularly when existing descriptions were incomplete or ambiguous. Human expert review showed strong agreement with high-performing models, with most descriptions rated as correct and low rates of hallucination. The system accurately reconstructed schema elements and flagged inconsistencies in existing documentation. In a text-to-SQL benchmark, augmenting database schemas with generated data dictionaries improved execution accuracy from 0.52 to 0.88. Discussion: Automated data dictionary generation improved both dataset interpretability and downstream analytical performances. Results highlight the importance of column-level metadata, particularly representative sample values, in grounding LLM-generated descriptions. Limitations include sensitivity to sample quality, potential domain-specific misinterpretation, and variability across model architectures, indicating that generated outputs should augment rather than replace expert curation. Conclusion: DataAtlas provides a practical approach for generating structured data dictionaries, enhancing the accessibility, reproducibility, and reuse of clinical data.
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.