mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Automated Risk-of-Bias Assessment of Randomized Controlled Trials: A First Look at a GEPA-trained Programmatic Prompting Framework

arXiv 2512.01452 ↗First posted 1 Dec 2025cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Assessing risk of bias (RoB) in randomized controlled trials is essential for trustworthy evidence synthesis, but the process is resource-intensive and prone to variability across reviewers. Large language models (LLMs) offer a route to automation, but existing methods rely on manually engineered prompts that are difficult to reproduce, generalize, or evaluate. This study introduces a programmable RoB assessment pipeline that replaces ad-hoc prompt design with structured, code-based optimization using DSPy and its GEPA module. GEPA refines LLM reasoning through Pareto-guided search and produces inspectable execution traces, enabling transparent replication of every step in the optimization process. We evaluated the method on 100 RCTs from published meta-analyses across seven RoB domains. GEPA-generated prompts were applied to both open-weight models (Mistral Small 3.1 with GPT-oss-20b) and commercial models (GPT-5 Nano and GPT-5 Mini). In domains with clearer methodological reporting, such as Random Sequence Generation, GEPA-generated prompts performed best, with similar results for Allocation Concealment and Blinding of Participants, while the commercial model performed slightly better overall. We also compared GEPA with three manually designed prompts using Claude 3.5 Sonnet. GEPA achieved the highest overall accuracy and improved performance by 30%-40% in Random Sequence Generation and Selective Reporting, and showed generally comparable, competitively aligned performance in the other domains relative to manual prompts. These findings suggest that GEPA can produce consistent and reproducible prompts for RoB assessment, supporting the structured and principled use of LLMs in evidence synthesis.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Dec 2025.

Builds on

7 of 69 references.

References · 7

  1. 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,386
  2. 2023DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelinescited by 832
  3. 2024Automatically Extracting Numerical Results from Randomized Controlled Trials with Large Language Modelscited by 9
  4. 2024Exploring the use of a Large Language Model for data extraction in systematic reviews: a rapid feasibility studycited by 8
  5. 2025Transforming Evidence Synthesis: A Systematic Review of the Evolution of Automated Meta-Analysis in the Age of AIcited by 7
  6. 2023Chat2Brain: A Method for Mapping Open-Ended Semantic Queries to Brain Activation Mapscited by 5
  7. 2025Compiling Prompts, Not Crafting Them: A Reproducible Workflow for AI-Assisted Evidence Synthesiscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025ROBoto2: An Interactive System and Dataset for LLM-assisted Clinical Trial Risk of Bias Assessment
  2. 2024Measuring Risk of Bias in Biomedical Reports: The RoBBR Benchmark
  3. 2026Employing General-Purpose and Biomedical Large Language Models with Advanced Prompt Engineering for Pharmacoepidemiologic Study Design
  4. 2025A Multi-faceted Analysis of Cognitive Abilities: Evaluating Prompt Methods with Large Language Models on the CONSORT Checklist
  5. 2024Bias patterns in the application of LLMs for clinical decision support: A comprehensive study
  6. 2025RiskAgent: Synergizing Language Models with Validated Tools for Evidence-Based Risk Prediction
  7. 2026Optimizing Large Language Models for Causality Assessment in Pharmacovigilance: Developing a Performance Metric as Objective for Bayesian Hyperparameter Optimization
  8. 2023AutoTrial: Prompting Language Models for Clinical Trial Design