Large language models in systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical treatments for vaginal vault prolapse

0Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Systematic reviews provide the highest level of evidence but remain resource-intensive. We evaluated the performance of a large language model (LLM; ChatGPT, OpenAI) in a PRISMA-guided review of randomized controlled trials on vaginal vault prolapse surgery. Prompts were carefully designed to minimize errors, and outputs were verified. Each task was completed within minutes. For title/abstract screening, recall was 69.8% and precision 85.7% (κ = 0.77); full-text agreement 94.1–100% (κ = 0.82–1); data extraction accuracy 87.5–99.7%. From 18 RCTs (1668 women), sacrocolpopexy (SC) showed higher anatomic success than sacrospinous fixation (SSF) (OR 1.42, 95% CI 0.71–2.84). Transvaginal mesh improved 3-year objective success compared with SSF (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.13–2.99) but had higher reoperation rates (5–16% vs 2–4%) than SC. We did not find conclusive evidence that any single technique is superior; most comparisons were underpowered, with wide confidence intervals and substantial heterogeneity. All LLM-derived statistical results were identical to those from conventional R analyses, confirming robustness. Validated LLM workflows can enable more efficient and scalable evidence synthesis.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Park, Y., Zhang, H. S., & Bai, S. W. (2026). Large language models in systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical treatments for vaginal vault prolapse. Npj Digital Medicine, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-026-02431-w

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free