ClinicalBench: Can LLMs Beat Traditional ML Models in Clinical Prediction?

Large Language Models (LLMs) hold great promise to revolutionize current clinical systems for their superior capacities on medical text processing tasks and medical licensing exams. Meanwhile, traditional ML models such as SVM and XGBoost have still been mainly adopted in clinical prediction tasks. An emerging question is Can LLMs beat traditional ML models in clinical prediction? Thus, we build a new benchmark ClinicalBench to comprehensively study the clinical predictive modeling capacities of both general-purpose and medical LLMs, and compare them with traditional ML models. ClinicalBench embraces three common clinical prediction tasks, two databases, 14 general-purpose LLMs, 8 medical LLMs, and 11 traditional ML models. Through extensive empirical investigation, we discover that both general-purpose and medical LLMs, even with different model scales, diverse prompting or fine-tuning strategies, still cannot beat traditional ML models in clinical prediction yet, shedding light on their potential deficiency in clinical reasoning and decision-making. We call for caution when practitioners adopt LLMs in clinical applications. ClinicalBench can be utilized to bridge the gap between LLMs' development for healthcare and real-world clinical practice.

Position Paper On Diagnostic Uncertainty Estimation from Large Language Models: Next-Word Probability Is Not Pre-test Probability

Large language models (LLMs) are being explored for diagnostic decision support, yet their ability to estimate pre-test probabilities, vital for clinical decision-making, remains limited. This study evaluates two LLMs, Mistral-7B and Llama3-70B, using structured electronic health record data on three diagnosis tasks. We examined three current methods of extracting LLM probability estimations and revealed their limitations. We aim to highlight the need for improved techniques in LLM confidence estimation.

Mapping Bias in Vision Language Models: Signposts, Pitfalls, and the Road Ahead

As Vision Language Models (VLMs) gain widespread use, their fairness remains under-explored. In this paper, we analyze demographic biases across five models and six datasets. We find that portrait datasets like UTKFace and CelebA are the best tools for bias detection, finding gaps in performance and fairness between LLaVa and CLIP models. However, scene based datasets like PATA, VLStereoSet fail to be useful benchmarks for bias due to their construction. As for pronoun based datasets like VisoGender, we receive mixed signals as only some subsets of the data are useful in providing insights. To alleviate this problem, we introduce a more difficult version of VisoGender to serve as a more rigorous evaluation. Based on these results, we call for more effective and carefully designed datasets to ensure VLMs are both fair and reliable.

Wait, but Tylenol is Acetaminophen... Investigating and Improving Language Models' Ability to Resist Requests for Misinformation

Background: Large language models (LLMs) are trained to follow directions, but this introduces a vulnerability to blindly comply with user requests even if they generate wrong information. In medicine, this could accelerate the generation of misinformation that impacts human well-being. Objectives/Methods: We analyzed compliance to requests to generate misleading content about medications in settings where models know the request is illogical. We investigated whether in-context directions and instruction-tuning of LLMs to prioritize logical reasoning over compliance reduced misinformation risk. Results: While all frontier LLMs complied with misinformation requests, both prompt-based and parameter-based approaches can improve the detection of logic flaws in requests and prevent the dissemination of medical misinformation. Conclusion: Shifting LLMs to prioritize logic over compliance could reduce risks of exploitation for medical misinformation.

When Raw Data Prevails: Are Large Language Model Embeddings Effective in Numerical Data Representation for Medical Machine Learning Applications?

The introduction of Large Language Models (LLMs) has advanced data representation and analysis, bringing significant progress in their use for medical questions and answering. Despite these advancements, integrating tabular data, especially numerical data pivotal in clinical contexts, into LLM paradigms has not been thoroughly explored. In this study, we examine the effectiveness of vector representations from last hidden states of LLMs for medical diagnostics and prognostics using electronic health record (EHR) data. We compare the performance of these embeddings with that of raw numerical EHR data when used as feature inputs to traditional machine learning (ML) algorithms that excel at tabular data learning, such as eXtreme Gradient Boosting. We focus on instruction-tuned LLMs in a zero-shot setting to represent abnormal physiological data and evaluating their utilities as feature extractors to enhance ML classifiers for predicting diagnoses, length of stay, and mortality. Furthermore, we examine prompt engineering techniques on zero-shot and few-shot LLM embeddings to measure their impact comprehensively. Although findings suggest the raw data features still prevails in medical ML tasks, zero-shot LLM embeddings demonstrate competitive results, suggesting a promising avenue for future research in medical applications.

Language Models are Surprisingly Fragile to Drug Names in Biomedical Benchmarks

Medical knowledge is context-dependent and requires consistent reasoning across various natural language expressions of semantically equivalent phrases. This is particularly crucial for drug names, where patients often use brand names like Advil or Tylenol instead of their generic equivalents. To study this, we create a new robustness dataset, RABBITS, to evaluate performance differences on medical benchmarks after swapping brand and generic drug names using physician expert annotations. We assess both open-source and API-based LLMs on MedQA and MedMCQA, revealing a consistent performance drop ranging from 1-10\%. Furthermore, we identify a potential source of this fragility as the contamination of test data in widely used pre-training datasets. All code is accessible at https://github.com/BittermanLab/RABBITS, and a HuggingFace leaderboard is available at https://huggingface.co/spaces/AIM-Harvard/rabbits-leaderboard.

Measuring Pointwise $\mathcal{V}$-Usable Information In-Context-ly

In-context learning (ICL) is a new learning paradigm that has gained popularity along with the development of large language models. In this work, we adapt a recently proposed hardness metric, pointwise $\mathcal{V}$-usable information (PVI), to an in-context version (in-context PVI). Compared to the original PVI, in-context PVI is more efficient in that it requires only a few exemplars and does not require fine-tuning. We conducted a comprehensive empirical analysis to evaluate the reliability of in-context PVI. Our findings indicate that in-context PVI estimates exhibit similar characteristics to the original PVI. Specific to the in-context setting, we show that in-context PVI estimates remain consistent across different exemplar selections and numbers of shots. The variance of in-context PVI estimates across different exemplar selections is insignificant, which suggests that in-context PVI are stable. Furthermore, we demonstrate how in-context PVI can be employed to identify challenging instances. Our work highlights the potential of in-context PVI and provides new insights into the capabilities of ICL.