ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Transforming Systematic Reviews: Evaluating a Fine-Tuned Large Language Model for Abstract Screening in Uveitis and Retinal Vasculitis: Fine-Tuned LLM for Review Screening.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the classification performance of UveAItis, a domain-specific large language model (LLM) fine-tuned for automated title and abstract screening in systematic reviews, using retinal vasculitis as a prototype. Design: Comparative evaluation study embedded within a registered systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42023489232). Subjects: A total of 1030 randomly selected articles from an initial search of 5533 records related to retinal vasculitis. Methods: Articles were independently screened by 2 uveitis experts (gold standard), final-year medical students, and 3 LLMs: UveAItis (fine-tuned Generative Pre-trained Transformer [GPT]-4o), base GPT-4o, and Claude Sonnet 3.5. Screening followed a 2-question binary logic regarding human subjects and primary empirical research design. Discrepancies were resolved through expert adjudication. Main Outcome Measures: Classification accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and Cohen Kappa coefficient for inter-rater agreement. Results: UveAItis achieved the highest performance with an accuracy of 93.3%, area under the curve (AUC) of 0.887, and Kappa of 0.77. It significantly outperformed base GPT-4o (AUC: 0.805, Conclusions: UveAItis demonstrated expert-level performance, significantly outperforming general-purpose LLMs and nonexpert human reviewers. These findings validate the potential of domain-specific fine-tuning to enhance the efficiency, scalability, and reproducibility of evidence synthesis in specialized medical fields like ophthalmology. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.