Large Language Models versus Classical Machine Learning: Performance in COVID-19 Mortality Prediction Using High-Dimensional Tabular Data

Background: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the performance of classical machine learning models (CMLs) and large language models (LLMs) in predicting mortality associated with COVID-19 by utilizing a high-dimensional tabular dataset. Materials and Methods: We analyzed data from 9,134 COVID-19 patients collected across four hospitals. Seven CML models, including XGBoost and random forest (RF), were trained and evaluated. The structured data was converted into text for zero-shot classification by eight LLMs, including GPT-4 and Mistral-7b. Additionally, Mistral-7b was fine-tuned using the QLoRA approach to enhance its predictive capabilities. Results: Among the CML models, XGBoost and RF achieved the highest accuracy, with F1 scores of 0.87 for internal validation and 0.83 for external validation. In the LLM category, GPT-4 was the top performer with an F1 score of 0.43. Fine-tuning Mistral-7b significantly improved its recall from 1% to 79%, resulting in an F1 score of 0.74, which was stable during external validation. Conclusion: While LLMs show moderate performance in zero-shot classification, fine-tuning can significantly enhance their effectiveness, potentially aligning them closer to CML models. However, CMLs still outperform LLMs in high-dimensional tabular data tasks.

Closing the gap between open-source and commercial large language models for medical evidence summarization

Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise in summarizing medical evidence. Most recent studies focus on the application of proprietary LLMs. Using proprietary LLMs introduces multiple risk factors, including a lack of transparency and vendor dependency. While open-source LLMs allow better transparency and customization, their performance falls short compared to proprietary ones. In this study, we investigated to what extent fine-tuning open-source LLMs can further improve their performance in summarizing medical evidence. Utilizing a benchmark dataset, MedReview, consisting of 8,161 pairs of systematic reviews and summaries, we fine-tuned three broadly-used, open-sourced LLMs, namely PRIMERA, LongT5, and Llama-2. Overall, the fine-tuned LLMs obtained an increase of 9.89 in ROUGE-L (95% confidence interval: 8.94-10.81), 13.21 in METEOR score (95% confidence interval: 12.05-14.37), and 15.82 in CHRF score (95% confidence interval: 13.89-16.44). The performance of fine-tuned LongT5 is close to GPT-3.5 with zero-shot settings. Furthermore, smaller fine-tuned models sometimes even demonstrated superior performance compared to larger zero-shot models. The above trends of improvement were also manifested in both human and GPT4-simulated evaluations. Our results can be applied to guide model selection for tasks demanding particular domain knowledge, such as medical evidence summarization.

Generative Large Language Models are autonomous practitioners of evidence-based medicine

Background: Evidence-based medicine (EBM) is fundamental to modern clinical practice, requiring clinicians to continually update their knowledge and apply the best clinical evidence in patient care. The practice of EBM faces challenges due to rapid advancements in medical research, leading to information overload for clinicians. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI), specifically Generative Large Language Models (LLMs), offers a promising solution towards managing this complexity. Methods: This study involved the curation of real-world clinical cases across various specialties, converting them into .json files for analysis. LLMs, including proprietary models like ChatGPT 3.5 and 4, Gemini Pro, and open-source models like LLaMA v2 and Mixtral-8x7B, were employed. These models were equipped with tools to retrieve information from case files and make clinical decisions similar to how clinicians must operate in the real world. Model performance was evaluated based on correctness of final answer, judicious use of tools, conformity to guidelines, and resistance to hallucinations. Results: GPT-4 was most capable of autonomous operation in a clinical setting, being generally more effective in ordering relevant investigations and conforming to clinical guidelines. Limitations were observed in terms of model ability to handle complex guidelines and diagnostic nuances. Retrieval Augmented Generation made recommendations more tailored to patients and healthcare systems. Conclusions: LLMs can be made to function as autonomous practitioners of evidence-based medicine. Their ability to utilize tooling can be harnessed to interact with the infrastructure of a real-world healthcare system and perform the tasks of patient management in a guideline directed manner. Prompt engineering may help to further enhance this potential and transform healthcare for the clinician and the patient.

Large Language Models for Granularized Barrett's Esophagus Diagnosis Classification

Diagnostic codes for Barrett's esophagus (BE), a precursor to esophageal cancer, lack granularity and precision for many research or clinical use cases. Laborious manual chart review is required to extract key diagnostic phenotypes from BE pathology reports. We developed a generalizable transformer-based method to automate data extraction. Using pathology reports from Columbia University Irving Medical Center with gastroenterologist-annotated targets, we performed binary dysplasia classification as well as granularized multi-class BE-related diagnosis classification. We utilized two clinically pre-trained large language models, with best model performance comparable to a highly tailored rule-based system developed using the same data. Binary dysplasia extraction achieves 0.964 F1-score, while the multi-class model achieves 0.911 F1-score. Our method is generalizable and faster to implement as compared to a tailored rule-based approach.