Explanatory Argument Extraction of Correct Answers in Resident Medical Exams

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.00567v1
• Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 13:22:35 GMT
• Title: Explanatory Argument Extraction of Correct Answers in Resident Medical Exams
• Authors: Iakes Goenaga, Aitziber Atutxa, Koldo Gojenola, Maite Oronoz, Rodrigo Agerri
• Abstract summary: We present a new dataset which includes not only explanatory arguments for the correct answer, but also arguments to reason why the incorrect answers are not correct. This new benchmark allows us to setup a novel extractive task which consists of identifying the explanation of the correct answer written by medical doctors.
• Score: 5.399800035598185
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Developing the required technology to assist medical experts in their everyday activities is currently a hot topic in the Artificial Intelligence research field. Thus, a number of large language models (LLMs) and automated benchmarks have recently been proposed with the aim of facilitating information extraction in Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) using natural language as a tool for mediating in human-AI interaction. The most representative benchmarks are limited to either multiple-choice or long-form answers and are available only in English. In order to address these shortcomings, in this paper we present a new dataset which, unlike previous work: (i) includes not only explanatory arguments for the correct answer, but also arguments to reason why the incorrect answers are not correct; (ii) the explanations are written originally by medical doctors to answer questions from the Spanish Residency Medical Exams. Furthermore, this new benchmark allows us to setup a novel extractive task which consists of identifying the explanation of the correct answer written by medical doctors. An additional benefit of our setting is that we can leverage the extractive QA paradigm to automatically evaluate performance of LLMs without resorting to costly manual evaluation by medical experts. Comprehensive experimentation with language models for Spanish shows that sometimes multilingual models fare better than monolingual ones, even outperforming models which have been adapted to the medical domain. Furthermore, results across the monolingual models are mixed, with supposedly smaller and inferior models performing competitively. In any case, the obtained results show that our novel dataset and approach can be an effective technique to help medical practitioners in identifying relevant evidence-based explanations for medical questions.

Related papers

• A Survey of Medical Vision-and-Language Applications and Their Techniques [48.268198631277315]
  Medical vision-and-language models (MVLMs) have attracted substantial interest due to their capability to offer a natural language interface for interpreting complex medical data. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of MVLMs and the various medical tasks to which they have been applied. We also examine the datasets used for these tasks and compare the performance of different models based on standardized evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-19T03:27:05Z)
• LLMs-in-the-loop Part-1: Expert Small AI Models for Bio-Medical Text Translation [0.0]
  This study introduces a novel "LLMs-in-the-loop" approach to develop supervised neural machine translation models optimized for medical texts. Custom parallel corpora in six languages were compiled from scientific articles, synthetically generated clinical documents, and medical texts. Our MarianMT-based models outperform Google Translate, DeepL, and GPT-4-Turbo.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T19:32:23Z)
• MedLM: Exploring Language Models for Medical Question Answering Systems [2.84801080855027]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) with their advanced generative capabilities have shown promise in various NLP tasks. This study aims to compare the performance of general and medical-specific distilled LMs for medical Q&A. The findings will provide valuable insights into the suitability of different LMs for specific applications in the medical domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-21T03:37:47Z)
• Self-Verification Improves Few-Shot Clinical Information Extraction [73.6905567014859]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to accelerate clinical curation via few-shot in-context learning. They still struggle with issues regarding accuracy and interpretability, especially in mission-critical domains such as health. Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using self-verification, which leverages the LLM to provide provenance for its own extraction and check its own outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T22:05:11Z)
• Cross-lingual Argument Mining in the Medical Domain [6.0158981171030685]
  We show how to perform Argument Mining (AM) in medical texts for which no annotated data is available. Our work shows that automatically translating and projecting annotations (data-transfer) from English to a given target language is an effective way to generate annotated data. We also show how the automatically generated data in Spanish can also be used to improve results in the original English monolingual setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-25T11:21:12Z)
• Towards more patient friendly clinical notes through language models and ontologies [57.51898902864543]
  We present a novel approach to automated medical text based on word simplification and language modelling. We use a new dataset pairs of publicly available medical sentences and a version of them simplified by clinicians. Our method based on a language model trained on medical forum data generates simpler sentences while preserving both grammar and the original meaning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-23T16:11:19Z)
• CBLUE: A Chinese Biomedical Language Understanding Evaluation Benchmark [51.38557174322772]
  We present the first Chinese Biomedical Language Understanding Evaluation benchmark. It is a collection of natural language understanding tasks including named entity recognition, information extraction, clinical diagnosis normalization, single-sentence/sentence-pair classification. We report empirical results with the current 11 pre-trained Chinese models, and experimental results show that state-of-the-art neural models perform by far worse than the human ceiling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T12:25:30Z)
• Benchmarking Automated Clinical Language Simplification: Dataset, Algorithm, and Evaluation [48.87254340298189]
  We construct a new dataset named MedLane to support the development and evaluation of automated clinical language simplification approaches. We propose a new model called DECLARE that follows the human annotation procedure and achieves state-of-the-art performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-04T06:09:02Z)
• Interpretable Multi-Step Reasoning with Knowledge Extraction on Complex Healthcare Question Answering [89.76059961309453]
  HeadQA dataset contains multiple-choice questions authorized for the public healthcare specialization exam. These questions are the most challenging for current QA systems. We present a Multi-step reasoning with Knowledge extraction framework (MurKe) We are striving to make full use of off-the-shelf pre-trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-06T02:47:46Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.