Following Entman’s observation that policy frames define social problems, diagnose causes and suggest remedies, we examined the strategies that 12 U.S. governors (from states matched according to population size and density, demographic composition, per capita incomes, geographic proximity, and COVID-19 incidence) used to frame COVID-19 policy agendas. After scraping the governors’ statements about COVID-19 from press releases issued from January 2020 to May 2023 (N = 14,629), we leveraged ChatGPT (GPT) to identify and assess the intensity of public health, economic stability, and civic vitality frames. Subsequent analysis explored differences in the framing strategies according to the governors’ political party and gender. In the process, this study underscores the importance of AI prompt engineering to realize GPT’s transformative potential to facilitate communication research by efficiently identifying and assessing the content of policy frames.

Systematic reviews are essential for evidence-based health care, but conducting them is time- and resource-consuming. To date, efforts have been made to accelerate and (semi-)automate various steps of systematic reviews through the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and the emergence of large language models (LLMs) promises further opportunities. One crucial but complex task within systematic review conduct is assessing the risk of bias (RoB) of included studies. Therefore, the aim of this study was to test the LLM Claude 2 for RoB assessment of 100 randomized controlled trials, published in English language from 2013 onwards, using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool (‘RoB 2’; involving judgements for five specific domains and an overall judgement). We assessed the agreement of RoB judgements by Claude with human judgements published in Cochrane reviews. The observed agreement between Claude and Cochrane authors ranged from 41% for the overall judgement to 71% for domain 4 (‘outcome measurement’). Cohen’s κ was lowest for domain 5 (‘selective reporting’; 0.10 (95% confidence interval (CI): −0.10–0.31)) and highest for domain 3 (‘missing data’; 0.31 (95% CI: 0.10–0.52)), indicating slight to fair agreement. Fair agreement was found for the overall judgement (Cohen’s κ: 0.22 (95% CI: 0.06–0.38)). Sensitivity analyses using alternative prompting techniques or the more recent version Claude 3 did not result in substantial changes. Currently, Claude’s RoB 2 judgements cannot replace human RoB assessment. However, the potential of LLMs to support RoB assessment should be further explored.

In the realm of process engineering, the pursuit of sustainability is paramount. Traditional approaches can be time-consuming and often struggle to address modern environmental challenges effectively. This article explores the integration of generative AI, as a powerful tool to generate solution ideas and solve problems in process engineering using a Solution-Driven Approach (SDA). SDA applies nature-inspired principles to tackle intricate engineering challenges. In this study, generative AI is trained to understand and use the SDA patterns to suggest solutions to complex engineering challenges.