Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

AI-Assisted Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews in Education

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2501.11840 v2 pith:4ZWO4CD7 submitted 2025-01-21 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords dataextractionllmsstudiesextractedhumanreviewssystematic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Systematic reviews are time-consuming endeavors that require knowledgeable human reviewers to screen studies for relevance and extract data following a specific coding scheme before any analysis or synthesis can occur. Large language models (LLMs) hold promise for substantially accelerating this process and reducing reviewer workload, yet their application within the context of systematic reviews in the field of education remains underexplored. We address this issue in two ways: through empirical studies and the iterative development of an open-source software tool. First, we conducted two empirical studies examining the efficacy of using LLMs for data extraction using data from a published review on pedagogical agents. We extracted a variety of data types from 112 studies and compared the results to data extracted by human coding. Results indicate that LLMs struggled with extracting data accurately and therefore are not ready to be used as primary data extraction tools without explicit human validation of the data extracted. These findings highlight the dire need for a human-in-the-loop (HIL) approach to AI-assisted data extraction. We then propose a HIL workflow and introduce and describe the development of a free, web-based, open-source tool designed to support user-friendly, human-validated data extraction with LLMs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. What Level of Automation is "Good Enough"? A Benchmark of Large Language Models for Meta-Analysis Data Extraction

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs used for meta-analysis data extraction show high precision but low recall, with domain-specific prompts providing the largest recall gains and supporting a three-tier human-oversight framework.

Pith tools