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.

MedCalc-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models for Medical Calculations

As opposed to evaluating computation and logic-based reasoning, current bench2 marks for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in medicine are primarily focused on question-answering involving domain knowledge and descriptive rea4 soning. While such qualitative capabilities are vital to medical diagnosis, in real5 world scenarios, doctors frequently use clinical calculators that follow quantitative equations and rule-based reasoning paradigms for evidence-based decision support. To this end, we propose MedCalc-Bench, a first-of-its-kind dataset focused on evaluating the medical calculation capability of LLMs. MedCalc-Bench contains an evaluation set of over 1000 manually reviewed instances from 55 different medical calculation tasks. Each instance in MedCalc-Bench consists of a patient note, a question requesting to compute a specific medical value, a ground truth answer, and a step-by-step explanation showing how the answer is obtained. While our evaluation results show the potential of LLMs in this area, none of them are effective enough for clinical settings. Common issues include extracting the incorrect entities, not using the correct equation or rules for a calculation task, or incorrectly performing the arithmetic for the computation. We hope our study highlights the quantitative knowledge and reasoning gaps in LLMs within medical settings, encouraging future improvements of LLMs for various clinical calculation tasks.

Augmenting Biomedical Named Entity Recognition with General-domain Resources

Training a neural network-based biomedical named entity recognition (BioNER) model usually requires extensive and costly human annotations. While several studies have employed multi-task learning with multiple BioNER datasets to reduce human effort, this approach does not consistently yield performance improvements and may introduce label ambiguity in different biomedical corpora. We aim to tackle those challenges through transfer learning from easily accessible resources with fewer concept overlaps with biomedical datasets. In this paper, we proposed GERBERA, a simple-yet-effective method that utilized a general-domain NER dataset for training. Specifically, we performed multi-task learning to train a pre-trained biomedical language model with both the target BioNER dataset and the general-domain dataset. Subsequently, we fine-tuned the models specifically for the BioNER dataset. We systematically evaluated GERBERA on five datasets of eight entity types, collectively consisting of 81,410 instances. Despite using fewer biomedical resources, our models demonstrated superior performance compared to baseline models trained with multiple additional BioNER datasets. Specifically, our models consistently outperformed the baselines in six out of eight entity types, achieving an average improvement of 0.9% over the best baseline performance across eight biomedical entity types sourced from five different corpora. Our method was especially effective in amplifying performance on BioNER datasets characterized by limited data, with a 4.7% improvement in F1 scores on the JNLPBA-RNA dataset.

Whose Side Are You On? Investigating the Political Stance of Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained significant popularity for their application in various everyday tasks such as text generation, summarization, and information retrieval. As the widespread adoption of LLMs continues to surge, it becomes increasingly crucial to ensure that these models yield responses that are politically impartial, with the aim of preventing information bubbles, upholding fairness in representation, and mitigating confirmation bias. In this paper, we propose a quantitative framework and pipeline designed to systematically investigate the political orientation of LLMs. Our investigation delves into the political alignment of LLMs across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics, spanning from abortion to LGBTQ issues. Across topics, the results indicate that LLMs exhibit a tendency to provide responses that closely align with liberal or left-leaning perspectives rather than conservative or right-leaning ones when user queries include details pertaining to occupation, race, or political affiliation. The findings presented in this study not only reaffirm earlier observations regarding the left-leaning characteristics of LLMs but also surface particular attributes, such as occupation, that are particularly susceptible to such inclinations even when directly steered towards conservatism. As a recommendation to avoid these models providing politicised responses, users should be mindful when crafting queries, and exercise caution in selecting neutral prompt language.