SynthesisInternational journal of obesity (2005)2026
Large language models in obesity: a systematic review.
Synthesis in International journal of obesity (2005), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Health in Obesity Care: Current Evidence, Challenges, and Future Directions.Current obesity reports · 2026Review
- Large language models in hepatology: A systematic review.Hepatology forum · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in obesity management: clinical evidence, translational gaps, and implementation priorities-a structured narrative review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveGenerative artificial intelligence (AI), particularly large language models (LLMs), is rapidly evolving and holds significant potential for addressing the multifaceted challenges of obesity management. This systematic review synthesizes current research on LLM applications within the obesity field, critically evaluating their performance, limitations, and key future research directions.
designElectronic databases, including MEDLINE, OVID, and SCOPUS, were systematically searched from inception to August 2025 to identify eligible studies. Eligible studies investigated the potential role of LLMs in obesity medical and surgical care. Key findings were extracted and synthesized narratively. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias across each study.
resultsThirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. The analysis reveals that LLMs are being applied across a diverse range of obesity-related topics, including personalized nutrition, educational interventions, guideline-directed medical therapy, weight loss strategies, anti-obesity medication information, and motivational interviewing. While some LLMs demonstrated promising accuracy and utility, substantial variability was observed. Numerous studies highlighted limitations, including inconsistent recommendations, inaccuracies, difficulties in handling complex scenarios, and a potential for biased outputs.
conclusionsGenerative AI and LLMs show considerable promise for enhancing various aspects of obesity management, from personalized interventions to clinical decision support. However, the current state of the technology exhibits crucial limitations regarding accuracy, consistency, and the ability to handle nuanced clinical situations, mandating a continued critical role for clinician oversight and validation. Further research is imperative to address these shortcomings, focusing on improving model training, validating performance in real-world settings, and addressing ethical considerations before widespread clinical implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41413746What 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.