Is an Ultra Large Natural Image-Based Foundation Model Superior to a Retina-Specific Model for Detecting Ocular and Systemic Diseases?

The advent of foundation models (FMs) is transforming medical domain. In ophthalmology, RETFound, a retina-specific FM pre-trained sequentially on 1.4 million natural images and 1.6 million retinal images, has demonstrated high adaptability across clinical applications. Conversely, DINOv2, a general-purpose vision FM pre-trained on 142 million natural images, has shown promise in non-medical domains. However, its applicability to clinical tasks remains underexplored. To address this, we conducted head-to-head evaluations by fine-tuning RETFound and three DINOv2 models (large, base, small) for ocular disease detection and systemic disease prediction tasks, across eight standardized open-source ocular datasets, as well as the Moorfields AlzEye and the UK Biobank datasets. DINOv2-large model outperformed RETFound in detecting diabetic retinopathy (AUROC=0.850-0.952 vs 0.823-0.944, across three datasets, all P<=0.007) and multi-class eye diseases (AUROC=0.892 vs. 0.846, P<0.001). In glaucoma, DINOv2-base model outperformed RETFound (AUROC=0.958 vs 0.940, P<0.001). Conversely, RETFound achieved superior performance over all DINOv2 models in predicting heart failure, myocardial infarction, and ischaemic stroke (AUROC=0.732-0.796 vs 0.663-0.771, all P<0.001). These trends persisted even with 10% of the fine-tuning data. These findings showcase the distinct scenarios where general-purpose and domain-specific FMs excel, highlighting the importance of aligning FM selection with task-specific requirements to optimise clinical performance.

Dialogue is Better Than Monologue: Instructing Medical LLMs via Strategical Conversations

Current medical AI systems often fail to replicate real-world clinical reasoning, as they are predominantly trained and evaluated on static text and question-answer tasks. These tuning methods and benchmarks overlook critical aspects like evidence-based reasoning and handling distracting information. To bridge this gap, we introduce a novel benchmark that simulates real-world diagnostic scenarios, integrating noise and difficulty levels aligned with USMLE standards. Moreover, we explore dialogue-based fine-tuning, which transforms static datasets into conversational formats to better capture iterative reasoning processes. Experiments show that dialogue-tuned models outperform traditional methods, with improvements of $9.64\%$ in multi-round reasoning scenarios and $6.18\%$ in accuracy in a noisy environment. Our findings highlight dialogue tuning as a promising approach for advancing clinically aligned and robust medical AI systems.

Enhancing Patient-Centric Communication: Leveraging LLMs to Simulate Patient Perspectives

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in role-playing scenarios, particularly in simulating domain-specific experts using tailored prompts. This ability enables LLMs to adopt the persona of individuals with specific backgrounds, offering a cost-effective and efficient alternative to traditional, resource-intensive user studies. By mimicking human behavior, LLMs can anticipate responses based on concrete demographic or professional profiles. In this paper, we evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in simulating individuals with diverse backgrounds and analyze the consistency of these simulated behaviors compared to real-world outcomes. In particular, we explore the potential of LLMs to interpret and respond to discharge summaries provided to patients leaving the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). We evaluate and compare with human responses the comprehensibility of discharge summaries among individuals with varying educational backgrounds, using this analysis to assess the strengths and limitations of LLM-driven simulations. Notably, when LLMs are primed with educational background information, they deliver accurate and actionable medical guidance 88% of the time. However, when other information is provided, performance significantly drops, falling below random chance levels. This preliminary study shows the potential benefits and pitfalls of automatically generating patient-specific health information from diverse populations. While LLMs show promise in simulating health personas, our results highlight critical gaps that must be addressed before they can be reliably used in clinical settings. Our findings suggest that a straightforward query-response model could outperform a more tailored approach in delivering health information. This is a crucial first step in understanding how LLMs can be optimized for personalized health communication while maintaining accuracy.

Information Extraction from Clinical Notes: Are We Ready to Switch to Large Language Models?

Backgrounds: Information extraction (IE) is critical in clinical natural language processing (NLP). While large language models (LLMs) excel on generative tasks, their performance on extractive tasks remains debated. Methods: We investigated Named Entity Recognition (NER) and Relation Extraction (RE) using 1,588 clinical notes from four sources (UT Physicians, MTSamples, MIMIC-III, and i2b2). We developed an annotated corpus covering 4 clinical entities and 16 modifiers, and compared instruction-tuned LLaMA-2 and LLaMA-3 against BiomedBERT in terms of performance, generalizability, computational resources, and throughput to BiomedBERT. Results: LLaMA models outperformed BiomedBERT across datasets. With sufficient training data, LLaMA showed modest improvements (1% on NER, 1.5-3.7% on RE); improvements were larger with limited training data. On unseen i2b2 data, LLaMA-3-70B outperformed BiomedBERT by 7% (F1) on NER and 4% on RE. However, LLaMA models required more computing resources and ran up to 28 times slower. We implemented "Kiwi," a clinical IE package featuring both models, available at https://kiwi.clinicalnlp.org/. Conclusion: This study is among the first to develop and evaluate a comprehensive clinical IE system using open-source LLMs. Results indicate that LLaMA models outperform BiomedBERT for clinical NER and RE but with higher computational costs and lower throughputs. These findings highlight that choosing between LLMs and traditional deep learning methods for clinical IE applications should remain task-specific, taking into account both performance metrics and practical considerations such as available computing resources and the intended use case scenarios.

Humans Continue to Outperform Large Language Models in Complex Clinical Decision-Making: A Study with Medical Calculators

Although large language models (LLMs) have been assessed for general medical knowledge using medical licensing exams, their ability to effectively support clinical decision-making tasks, such as selecting and using medical calculators, remains uncertain. Here, we evaluate the capability of both medical trainees and LLMs to recommend medical calculators in response to various multiple-choice clinical scenarios such as risk stratification, prognosis, and disease diagnosis. We assessed eight LLMs, including open-source, proprietary, and domain-specific models, with 1,009 question-answer pairs across 35 clinical calculators and measured human performance on a subset of 100 questions. While the highest-performing LLM, GPT-4o, provided an answer accuracy of 74.3% (CI: 71.5-76.9%), human annotators, on average, outperformed LLMs with an accuracy of 79.5% (CI: 73.5-85.0%). With error analysis showing that the highest-performing LLMs continue to make mistakes in comprehension (56.6%) and calculator knowledge (8.1%), our findings emphasize that humans continue to surpass LLMs on complex clinical tasks such as calculator recommendation.

Demystifying Large Language Models for Medicine: A Primer

Large language models (LLMs) represent a transformative class of AI tools capable of revolutionizing various aspects of healthcare by generating human-like responses across diverse contexts and adapting to novel tasks following human instructions. Their potential application spans a broad range of medical tasks, such as clinical documentation, matching patients to clinical trials, and answering medical questions. In this primer paper, we propose an actionable guideline to help healthcare professionals more efficiently utilize LLMs in their work, along with a set of best practices. This approach consists of several main phases, including formulating the task, choosing LLMs, prompt engineering, fine-tuning, and deployment. We start with the discussion of critical considerations in identifying healthcare tasks that align with the core capabilities of LLMs and selecting models based on the selected task and data, performance requirements, and model interface. We then review the strategies, such as prompt engineering and fine-tuning, to adapt standard LLMs to specialized medical tasks. Deployment considerations, including regulatory compliance, ethical guidelines, and continuous monitoring for fairness and bias, are also discussed. By providing a structured step-by-step methodology, this tutorial aims to equip healthcare professionals with the tools necessary to effectively integrate LLMs into clinical practice, ensuring that these powerful technologies are applied in a safe, reliable, and impactful manner.

MedINST: Meta Dataset of Biomedical Instructions

The integration of large language model (LLM) techniques in the field of medical analysis has brought about significant advancements, yet the scarcity of large, diverse, and well-annotated datasets remains a major challenge. Medical data and tasks, which vary in format, size, and other parameters, require extensive preprocessing and standardization for effective use in training LLMs. To address these challenges, we introduce MedINST, the Meta Dataset of Biomedical Instructions, a novel multi-domain, multi-task instructional meta-dataset. MedINST comprises 133 biomedical NLP tasks and over 7 million training samples, making it the most comprehensive biomedical instruction dataset to date. Using MedINST as the meta dataset, we curate MedINST32, a challenging benchmark with different task difficulties aiming to evaluate LLMs' generalization ability. We fine-tune several LLMs on MedINST and evaluate on MedINST32, showcasing enhanced cross-task generalization.

LMOD: A Large Multimodal Ophthalmology Dataset and Benchmark for Large Vision-Language Models

Ophthalmology relies heavily on detailed image analysis for diagnosis and treatment planning. While large vision-language models (LVLMs) have shown promise in understanding complex visual information, their performance on ophthalmology images remains underexplored. We introduce LMOD, a dataset and benchmark for evaluating LVLMs on ophthalmology images, covering anatomical understanding, diagnostic analysis, and demographic extraction. LMODincludes 21,993 images spanning optical coherence tomography, scanning laser ophthalmoscopy, eye photos, surgical scenes, and color fundus photographs. We benchmark 13 state-of-the-art LVLMs and find that they are far from perfect for comprehending ophthalmology images. Models struggle with diagnostic analysis and demographic extraction, reveal weaknesses in spatial reasoning, diagnostic analysis, handling out-of-domain queries, and safeguards for handling biomarkers of ophthalmology images.

Federated Graph Learning with Adaptive Importance-based Sampling

For privacy-preserving graph learning tasks involving distributed graph datasets, federated learning (FL)-based GCN (FedGCN) training is required. A key challenge for FedGCN is scaling to large-scale graphs, which typically incurs high computation and communication costs when dealing with the explosively increasing number of neighbors. Existing graph sampling-enhanced FedGCN training approaches ignore graph structural information or dynamics of optimization, resulting in high variance and inaccurate node embeddings. To address this limitation, we propose the Federated Adaptive Importance-based Sampling (FedAIS) approach. It achieves substantial computational cost saving by focusing the limited resources on training important nodes, while reducing communication overhead via adaptive historical embedding synchronization. The proposed adaptive importance-based sampling method jointly considers the graph structural heterogeneity and the optimization dynamics to achieve optimal trade-off between efficiency and accuracy. Extensive evaluations against five state-of-the-art baselines on five real-world graph datasets show that FedAIS achieves comparable or up to 3.23% higher test accuracy, while saving communication and computation costs by 91.77% and 85.59%.

Enhancing Large Language Models with Domain-specific Retrieval Augment Generation: A Case Study on Long-form Consumer Health Question Answering in Ophthalmology

Despite the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs) in medicine, they may generate responses lacking supporting evidence or based on hallucinated evidence. While Retrieval Augment Generation (RAG) is popular to address this issue, few studies implemented and evaluated RAG in downstream domain-specific applications. We developed a RAG pipeline with 70,000 ophthalmology-specific documents that retrieve relevant documents to augment LLMs during inference time. In a case study on long-form consumer health questions, we systematically evaluated the responses including over 500 references of LLMs with and without RAG on 100 questions with 10 healthcare professionals. The evaluation focuses on factuality of evidence, selection and ranking of evidence, attribution of evidence, and answer accuracy and completeness. LLMs without RAG provided 252 references in total. Of which, 45.3% hallucinated, 34.1% consisted of minor errors, and 20.6% were correct. In contrast, LLMs with RAG significantly improved accuracy (54.5% being correct) and reduced error rates (18.8% with minor hallucinations and 26.7% with errors). 62.5% of the top 10 documents retrieved by RAG were selected as the top references in the LLM response, with an average ranking of 4.9. The use of RAG also improved evidence attribution (increasing from 1.85 to 2.49 on a 5-point scale, P<0.001), albeit with slight decreases in accuracy (from 3.52 to 3.23, P=0.03) and completeness (from 3.47 to 3.27, P=0.17). The results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibited hallucinated and erroneous evidence in the responses, raising concerns for downstream applications in the medical domain. RAG substantially reduced the proportion of such evidence but encountered challenges.