Abstract
ABSTRACTThis study evaluated the performance of ChatGPT‐3.5 and ChatGPT‐4 in developing search strategies for systematic reviews. Using the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) framework, we employed a two‐round testing format for each version. In the first round, both versions displayed comparable competencies when assessed quantitatively by the PRESS measures. However, qualitative feedback from two professional health sciences librarians indicated that ChatGPT‐4 outperformed ChatGPT‐3.5, particularly in suggesting MeSH term inclusion and refining search strategy formulations. In the second round, prompts were refined based on the feedback from the previous round of testing. Both qualitative and quantitative evaluation results confirmed ChatGPT‐4's superiority. This study provides empirical evidence of advancements in language model capabilities, highlighting ChatGPT‐4's enhanced efficiency and accuracy in developing search strategies for systematic reviews.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
