The Semantic MEDLINE Database (SemMedDB) has limited performance in identifying entities and relations, while also neglects variations in argument quality, especially persuasive strength across different sentences. The present study aims to utilize large language models (LLMs) to evaluate the contextual argument quality of triples in SemMedDB to improve the understanding of disease mechanisms. Using argument mining methods, we first design a quality evaluation framework across four major dimensions, triples' accuracy, triple-sentence correlation, research object, and evidence cogency, to evaluate the argument quality of the triple-based claim according to their contextual sentences. Then we choose a sample of 66 triple-sentence pairs for repeated annotations and framework optimization. As a result, the predicted performances of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are excellent with an accuracy up to 0.90 in the complex cogency evaluation task. The tentative case evaluating whether there exists an association between gestational diabetes and periodontitis reveals accurate predictions (GPT-4, accuracy, 0.88). LLMs-enabled argument quality evaluation is promising for evidence integration in understanding disease mechanisms, especially how evidence in two stances with varying levels of cogency evolves over time.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

This study was funded by the National Key R&D Program for Young Scientists (Project number 2022YFF0712000 to JD) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project number 72074006 to JD).

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors