Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Agreement Between Large Language Models, Human Reviewers, and Authors in Evaluating STROBE Checklists for Observational Studies in Rheumatology

Introduction: Evaluating compliance with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement can be time-consuming and subjective. This study compares STROBE assessments from large language models (LLMs), a human reviewer panel, and the original manuscript authors in observational rheumatology research. Methods: Guided by the GRRAS and DEAL Pathway B frameworks, 17 rheumatology articles were independently assessed. Evaluations used the 22-item STROBE checklist, completed by the authors, a five-person human panel (ranging from junior to senior professionals), and two LLMs (ChatGPT-5.2, Gemini-3Pro). Items were grouped into Methodological Rigor and Pr...

AuthorsEmre Bilgin, Ebru Ozturk, Meera Shah et al.
Primary categorycs.DL
Published12 March 2026
Last updated at source12 March 2026
cs.DLcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/95e94a01-7a4d-43e7-9f3c-304969d5c15f" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Popularity, last 2 days

0 now. Counts as reported by the source, snapshotted daily by Silytics.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 18 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.