ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Benchmarking Large Language Models for Predictive Modeling in Biomedical Research With a Focus on Reproductive Health.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generative AI, particularly large language models (LLMs), is increasingly being used in computational biology to support code generation for data analysis. In this study, we evaluated the ability of LLMs to generate functional R and Python code for predictive modeling tasks, leveraging standardized molecular datasets from several recent DREAM (Dialogue for Reverse Engineering Assessments and Methods) Challenges focused on reproductive health. We assessed LLM performance across four predictive tasks derived from three DREAM challenges: gestational age regression from gene expression, gestational age regression from DNA methylation profiles, and classification of preterm birth and early preterm birth from microbiome data. LLMs were prompted with task descriptions, data locations, and target outcomes. LLM-generated code was then run to fit and apply prediction models and generate graphics, and they were ranked based on their success in completing the tasks and achieving strong test set performance. Among the eight LLMs tested, o3-mini-high, 4o, DeepseekR1 and Gemini 2.0 completed at least one task without error. Overall, R code generation was more successful (14/16 tasks) than Python (7/16), attributed to the utility of Bioconductor packages for querying Gene Expression Omnibus data. OpenAI's o3-mini-high outperformed others, completing 7/8 tasks. Test set performance of the top LLM matched or exceeded top-performing teams from the original DREAM challenges. These findings underscore the potential of LLMs to enhance exploratory analysis and democratize access to predictive modeling in omics by automating key components of analysis pipelines, and highlight the potential to increase research output when conducting analyses of standardized datasets from public repositories.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.