mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Reassessing Large Language Model Boolean Query Generation for Systematic Reviews

arXiv 2505.07155 ↗First posted 12 May 2025cs.IR cs.CLcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Systematic reviews are comprehensive literature reviews that address highly focused research questions and represent the highest form of evidence in medicine. A critical step in this process is the development of complex Boolean queries to retrieve relevant literature. Given the difficulty of manually constructing these queries, recent efforts have explored Large Language Models (LLMs) to assist in their formulation. One of the first studies,Wang et al., investigated ChatGPT for this task, followed by Staudinger et al., which evaluated multiple LLMs in a reproducibility study. However, the latter overlooked several key aspects of the original work, including (i) validation of generated queries, (ii) output formatting constraints, and (iii) selection of examples for chain-of-thought (Guided) prompting. As a result, its findings diverged significantly from the original study. In this work, we systematically reproduce both studies while addressing these overlooked factors. Our results show that query effectiveness varies significantly across models and prompt designs, with guided query formulation benefiting from well-chosen seed studies. Overall, prompt design and model selection are key drivers of successful query formulation. Our findings provide a clearer understanding of LLMs' potential in Boolean query generation and highlight the importance of model- and prompt-specific optimisations. The complex nature of systematic reviews adds to challenges in both developing and reproducing methods but also highlights the importance of reproducibility studies in this domain.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2025.

Builds on

8 of 26 references.

References · 8

  1. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
  2. 2023Zephyr: Direct Distillation of LM Alignmentcited by 498
  3. 2024Let Me Speak Freely? A Study on the Impact of Format Restrictions on Performance of Large Language Modelscited by 90
  4. 2023Can ChatGPT Write a Good Boolean Query for Systematic Review Literature Search?cited by 54
  5. 2024A Reproducibility and Generalizability Study of Large Language Models for Query Generationcited by 10
  6. 2021Seed-driven Document Ranking for Systematic Reviews: A Reproducibility Studycited by 6
  7. 2022Automated MeSH Term Suggestion for Effective Query Formulation in Systematic Reviews Literature Searchcited by 6
  8. 2023Generating Natural Language Queries for More Effective Systematic Review Screening Prioritisationcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Can Large Language Models Match the Conclusions of Systematic Reviews?
  2. 2025Evaluating Large Language Models for Evidence-Based Clinical Question Answering
  3. 2025Evaluating Prompting Strategies and Large Language Models in Systematic Literature Review Screening: Relevance and Task-Stage Classification
  4. 2025Grounding Large Language Models in Clinical Evidence: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Querying UK NICE Clinical Guidelines
  5. 2025Rethinking Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Medicine: A Large-Scale, Systematic Expert Evaluation and Practical Insights
  6. 2024Empowering Meta-Analysis: Leveraging Large Language Models for Scientific Synthesis
  7. 2026A primer on evaluation methods for large language models in healthcare
  8. 2024A Review on Scientific Knowledge Extraction using Large Language Models in Biomedical Sciences