ArticleIndian journal of psychiatry2026
Evaluating psychiatric conference posters: Benchmarking a custom generative pre-trained transformer against human inter-rater variability using a structured assessment framework.
Article in Indian journal of psychiatry, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Scientific poster assessment lacks standardized and discipline-neutral rubrics. Assessment by human reviewers (HRs) is subject to inter-rater variability. Aim: To assess PA²IRS (Poster Assessment via AI-Integrated Rubric System) framework for AI-assisted psychiatric poster evaluation, and conducted a reliability study comparing AI and HR agreement. Methods: PA²IRS was developed through an AI-assisted iterative criterion refinement process modelled on Delphi principles. Sixty posters (30-case reports/series [CR], 20 original research [OR], 10-systematic review-Meta-analysis [SRMA]) were randomly sampled. Three qualified mental health professionals served as independent reviewers. A custom-GPT (GPT-5.2, GO-subscription) provided AI assessments across three domains: Domain-A (content quality, poster-type specific), Domain-B (visual), and Domain-C (impact). PA²IRS is a 100-point instrument combining an AI-assessable poster component and an in-person interview component. This study concerns only the poster component. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Passing-Bablok regression, Bland-Altman analysis, and variance component analysis were performed using appropriate statistical tools. Results: AI-human single-measure ICCs [Overall (0.62), Domain-A (0.63), Domain-B (0.44), Domain-C (0.55)] met or exceeded human-human ICCs (0.42, 0.40, 0.27, 0.48) across all domains. Four-rater ICC (with AI) reached 0.75. Variance ratios (AI-human vs inter-human spread) were ≤1.0 across all domains for all posters combined. The SRMA subgroup showed variance ratios of 0.09-0.13 for Domains A and B (Bartlett Conclusion: AI-human agreement was within or exceeded the inter-human reliability range across three domains. The domain-dependent agreement pattern is consistent with dual-process cognitive theory. PA²IRS supports use as a scalable, standardized, and cross-disciplinarily competent formative biomedical poster assessment tool.
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.