A Literature Review and Framework for Human Evaluation of Generative Large Language Models in Healthcare

As generative artificial intelligence (AI), particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), continues to permeate healthcare, it remains crucial to supplement traditional automated evaluations with human expert evaluation. Understanding and evaluating the generated texts is vital for ensuring safety, reliability, and effectiveness. However, the cumbersome, time-consuming, and non-standardized nature of human evaluation presents significant obstacles to the widespread adoption of LLMs in practice. This study reviews existing literature on human evaluation methodologies for LLMs within healthcare. We highlight a notable need for a standardized and consistent human evaluation approach. Our extensive literature search, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, spans publications from January 2018 to February 2024. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the human evaluation approaches used in diverse healthcare applications.This analysis examines the human evaluation of LLMs across various medical specialties, addressing factors such as evaluation dimensions, sample types, and sizes, the selection and recruitment of evaluators, frameworks and metrics, the evaluation process, and statistical analysis of the results. Drawing from diverse evaluation strategies highlighted in these studies, we propose a comprehensive and practical framework for human evaluation of generative LLMs, named QUEST: Quality of Information, Understanding and Reasoning, Expression Style and Persona, Safety and Harm, and Trust and Confidence. This framework aims to improve the reliability, generalizability, and applicability of human evaluation of generative LLMs in different healthcare applications by defining clear evaluation dimensions and offering detailed guidelines.

Enhancing Large Language Models for Clinical Decision Support by Incorporating Clinical Practice Guidelines

Background Large Language Models (LLMs), enhanced with Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs), can significantly improve Clinical Decision Support (CDS). However, methods for incorporating CPGs into LLMs are not well studied. Methods We develop three distinct methods for incorporating CPGs into LLMs: Binary Decision Tree (BDT), Program-Aided Graph Construction (PAGC), and Chain-of-Thought-Few-Shot Prompting (CoT-FSP). To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed methods, we create a set of synthetic patient descriptions and conduct both automatic and human evaluation of the responses generated by four LLMs: GPT-4, GPT-3.5 Turbo, LLaMA, and PaLM 2. Zero-Shot Prompting (ZSP) was used as the baseline method. We focus on CDS for COVID-19 outpatient treatment as the case study. Results All four LLMs exhibit improved performance when enhanced with CPGs compared to the baseline ZSP. BDT outperformed both CoT-FSP and PAGC in automatic evaluation. All of the proposed methods demonstrated high performance in human evaluation. Conclusion LLMs enhanced with CPGs demonstrate superior performance, as compared to plain LLMs with ZSP, in providing accurate recommendations for COVID-19 outpatient treatment, which also highlights the potential for broader applications beyond the case study.