Measuring Risk of Bias in Biomedical Reports: The RoBBR Benchmark
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Systems that answer questions by reviewing the scientific literature are becoming increasingly feasible. To draw reliable conclusions, these systems should take into account the quality of available evidence from different studies, placing more weight on studies that use a valid methodology. We present a benchmark for measuring the methodological strength of biomedical papers, drawing on the risk-of-bias framework used for systematic reviews. Derived from over 500 biomedical studies, the three benchmark tasks encompass expert reviewers' judgments of studies' research methodologies, including the assessments of risk of bias within these studies. The benchmark contains a human-validated annotation pipeline for fine-grained alignment of reviewers' judgments with research paper sentences. Our analyses show that large language models' reasoning and retrieval capabilities impact their effectiveness with risk-of-bias assessment. The dataset is available at https://github.com/RoBBR-Benchmark/RoBBR.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 108 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Nov 2024.
Builds on
20 of 108 references.
References · 20
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
- 2020Stanza: A Python Natural Language Processing Toolkit for Many Human Languagescited by 723
- 2018A Discourse-Aware Attention Model for Abstractive Summarization of Long Documentscited by 478
- 2024Generative Representational Instruction Tuningcited by 233
- 2023MedCPT: Contrastive Pre-trained Transformers with Large-scale PubMed Search Logs for Zero-shot Biomedical Information Retrievalcited by 185
- 2019A Question-Entailment Approach to Question Answeringcited by 134
- 2023ReviewerGPT? An Exploratory Study on Using Large Language Models for Paper Reviewingcited by 122
- 2024Retrieval Augmented Generation or Long-Context LLMs? A Comprehensive Study and Hybrid Approachcited by 119
- 2020Generating (Factual?) Narrative Summaries of RCTs: Experiments with Neural Multi-Document Summarizationcited by 52
- 2016Rationale-Augmented Convolutional Neural Networks for Text Classificationcited by 39
8 more
- 2023Automated Paper Screening for Clinical Reviews Using Large Language Modelscited by 29
- 2021CSFCube -- A Test Collection of Computer Science Research Articles for Faceted Query by Examplecited by 20
- 2024Zero-shot Generative Large Language Models for Systematic Review Screening Automationcited by 14
- 2023DORIS-MAE: Scientific Document Retrieval using Multi-level Aspect-based Queriescited by 11
- 2023Jointly Extracting Interventions, Outcomes, and Findings from RCT Reports with LLMscited by 10
- 2023Automated title and abstract screening for scoping reviews using the GPT-4 Large Language Modelcited by 6
- 2018Advancing PICO Element Detection in Biomedical Text via Deep Neural Networkscited by 4
- 2022CCS Explorer: Relevance Prediction, Extractive Summarization, and Named Entity Recognition from Clinical Cohort Studiescited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026CT Open: An Open-Access, Uncontaminated, Live Platform for the Open Challenge of Clinical Trial Outcome Predictioncited by 2
- 2026Toward Reliable, Safe, and Secure LLMs for Scientific Applicationscited by 1
- 2026AutoForest: Automatically Generating Forest Plots from Biomedical Studies with End-to-End Evidence Extraction and Synthesiscited by 1
- 2026Can LLMs Follow Medical Expert Logic? A Benchmark for Hierarchical Logical Consistency in Risk-of-Bias Assessmentcited by 0
- 2026Can LLMs Follow Medical Expert Logic? A Benchmark for Hierarchical Logical Consistency in Risk-of-Bias Assessment10 Sep 2026
- 2026AutoForest: Automatically Generating Forest Plots from Biomedical Studies with End-to-End Evidence Extraction and Synthesis1 Jun 2026
- 2026CT Open: An Open-Access, Uncontaminated, Live Platform for the Open Challenge of Clinical Trial Outcome Prediction17 Apr 2026
- 2026Toward Reliable, Safe, and Secure LLMs for Scientific Applications18 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Can Large Language Models Match the Conclusions of Systematic Reviews?
- 2025ROBoto2: An Interactive System and Dataset for LLM-assisted Clinical Trial Risk of Bias Assessment
- 2025Automated Risk-of-Bias Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials: A First Look at a GEPA-trained Programmatic Prompting Framework
- 2024Streamlining Systematic Reviews: A Novel Application of Large Language Models
- 2025Query-driven Document-level Scientific Evidence Extraction from Biomedical Studies
- 2026Evaluating AI-based Scientific Knowledge Synthesis with Epidemiological Systematic Reviews
- 2026MedMeta: A Benchmark for LLMs in Synthesizing Meta-Analysis Conclusion from Medical Studies
- 2025Evaluation of Clinical Trials Reporting Quality using Large Language Models