Academic Journal
Artificial Intelligence Applications Versus Manual Methods For Literature Retrieval: A Comparative Analysis.
| Τίτλος: | Artificial Intelligence Applications Versus Manual Methods For Literature Retrieval: A Comparative Analysis. |
|---|---|
| Συγγραφείς: | O'Rourke J; Parkinson School of Health Sciences and Public Health, Loyola University Chicago, IL, USA., Byrne M; Mayo Clinic-Office of the Chief Technology Officer, Rochester, MN, USA., Schroers G; Marcella Niehoff School of Nursing, Loyola University Chicago, IL, USA. |
| Πηγή: | Western journal of nursing research [West J Nurs Res] 2026 Aug; Vol. 48 (8), pp. 887-894. Date of Electronic Publication: 2026 Jun 10. |
| Τύπος έκδοσης: | Journal Article; Comparative Study |
| Γλώσσα: | English |
| Στοιχεία περιοδικού: | Publisher: Sage Publications Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 7905435 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1552-8456 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 01939459 NLM ISO Abbreviation: West J Nurs Res Subsets: MEDLINE |
| Imprint Name(s): | Publication: Beverly Hills, CA : Sage Publications Original Publication: [Anaheim, Calif.] Phillips-Allen. |
| Ιατρικοί όροι (MeSH): | Artificial Intelligence*/trends , Artificial Intelligence*/standards , Information Storage and Retrieval*/methods , Information Storage and Retrieval*/standards, Humans ; Generative Artificial Intelligence ; Large Language Models |
| Περίληψη: | Background: Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly generative and large language models, is being used in nursing education, practice, and scholarly writing. Generative AI applications have been specifically examined for their use in conducting literature reviews with evidence supporting reduced production time of scholarly work. However, there has been limited investigation of their levels of accuracy with identifying references for a literature review. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare human-generated citations of literature reviews with AI literature-review generated citations. Methods: Using a comparative exploratory design, references from 4 human-written literature reviews, 2 published and 2 unpublished, on 4 different topics, were compared to references derived from 2 AI literature applications, Consensus and Elicit. Three prompting strategies were utilized, including prompts generated using ChatGPT-4. Agreement between the AI and human references was evaluated. Results: The percent of agreement between AI and human generated reference lists ranged from 0% to 63.6%. The Consensus application had a greater overall mean rate of match (21.3%) as compared to Elicit (3.7%). The use of a ChatGPT-4 prompt did not significantly impact results, and there were no differences based on published or unpublished literature reviews. Conclusion: The 2 literature-based applications examined in this study offered a glimpse of their potential use and limitations. The use of an AI literature review application may support but not replace human work. |
| Competing Interests: | Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. |
| Contributed Indexing: | Keywords: artificial intelligence; large language models; literature search; nursing; nursing research |
| Entry Date(s): | Date Created: 20260610 Date Completed: 20260713 Latest Revision: 20260713 |
| Update Code: | 20260713 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/01939459261451723 |
| PMID: | 42267644 |
| Βάση Δεδομένων: | MEDLINE |
καταχωρήστε σχόλιο πρώτοι!