EHRNoteQA: An LLM Benchmark for Real-World Clinical Practice Using Discharge Summaries
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.16040v4
- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 04:28:12 GMT
- Title: EHRNoteQA: An LLM Benchmark for Real-World Clinical Practice Using Discharge Summaries
- Authors: Sunjun Kweon, Jiyoun Kim, Heeyoung Kwak, Dongchul Cha, Hangyul Yoon, Kwanghyun Kim, Jeewon Yang, Seunghyun Won, Edward Choi,
- Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) show promise in efficiently analyzing vast and complex data.
We introduce EHRNoteQA, a novel benchmark built on the MIMIC-IV EHR, comprising 962 different QA pairs each linked to distinct patients' discharge summaries.
EHRNoteQA includes questions that require information across multiple discharge summaries and covers eight diverse topics, mirroring the complexity and diversity of real clinical inquiries.
- Score: 9.031182965159976
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Discharge summaries in Electronic Health Records (EHRs) are crucial for clinical decision-making, but their length and complexity make information extraction challenging, especially when dealing with accumulated summaries across multiple patient admissions. Large Language Models (LLMs) show promise in addressing this challenge by efficiently analyzing vast and complex data. Existing benchmarks, however, fall short in properly evaluating LLMs' capabilities in this context, as they typically focus on single-note information or limited topics, failing to reflect the real-world inquiries required by clinicians. To bridge this gap, we introduce EHRNoteQA, a novel benchmark built on the MIMIC-IV EHR, comprising 962 different QA pairs each linked to distinct patients' discharge summaries. Every QA pair is initially generated using GPT-4 and then manually reviewed and refined by three clinicians to ensure clinical relevance. EHRNoteQA includes questions that require information across multiple discharge summaries and covers eight diverse topics, mirroring the complexity and diversity of real clinical inquiries. We offer EHRNoteQA in two formats: open-ended and multi-choice question answering, and propose a reliable evaluation method for each. We evaluate 27 LLMs using EHRNoteQA and examine various factors affecting the model performance (e.g., the length and number of discharge summaries). Furthermore, to validate EHRNoteQA as a reliable proxy for expert evaluations in clinical practice, we measure the correlation between the LLM performance on EHRNoteQA, and the LLM performance manually evaluated by clinicians. Results show that LLM performance on EHRNoteQA have higher correlation with clinician-evaluated performance (Spearman: 0.78, Kendall: 0.62) compared to other benchmarks, demonstrating its practical relevance in evaluating LLMs in clinical settings.
Related papers
- AGENT-CQ: Automatic Generation and Evaluation of Clarifying Questions for Conversational Search with LLMs [53.6200736559742]
AGENT-CQ consists of two stages: a generation stage and an evaluation stage.
CrowdLLM simulates human crowdsourcing judgments to assess generated questions and answers.
Experiments on the ClariQ dataset demonstrate CrowdLLM's effectiveness in evaluating question and answer quality.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-25T17:06:27Z) - MEDIC: Towards a Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating LLMs in Clinical Applications [2.838746648891565]
We introduce MEDIC, a framework assessing Large Language Models (LLMs) across five critical dimensions of clinical competence.
We apply MEDIC to evaluate LLMs on medical question-answering, safety, summarization, note generation, and other tasks.
Results show performance disparities across model sizes, baseline vs medically finetuned models, and have implications on model selection for applications requiring specific model strengths.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-11T14:44:51Z) - MACAROON: Training Vision-Language Models To Be Your Engaged Partners [95.32771929749514]
Large vision-language models (LVLMs) generate detailed responses even when questions are ambiguous or unlabeled.
In this study, we aim to shift LVLMs from passive answer providers to proactive engaged partners.
We introduce MACAROON, self-iMaginAtion for ContrAstive pReference OptimizatiON, which instructs LVLMs to autonomously generate contrastive response pairs for unlabeled questions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T09:27:33Z) - AgentClinic: a multimodal agent benchmark to evaluate AI in simulated clinical environments [2.567146936147657]
We introduce AgentClinic, a multimodal agent benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLM) in simulated clinical environments.
We find that solving MedQA problems in the sequential decision-making format of AgentClinic is considerably more challenging, resulting in diagnostic accuracies that can drop to below a tenth of the original accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-13T17:38:53Z) - Large Language Models in the Clinic: A Comprehensive Benchmark [63.21278434331952]
We build a benchmark ClinicBench to better understand large language models (LLMs) in the clinic.
We first collect eleven existing datasets covering diverse clinical language generation, understanding, and reasoning tasks.
We then construct six novel datasets and clinical tasks that are complex but common in real-world practice.
We conduct an extensive evaluation of twenty-two LLMs under both zero-shot and few-shot settings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-25T15:51:06Z) - AI Hospital: Benchmarking Large Language Models in a Multi-agent Medical Interaction Simulator [69.51568871044454]
We introduce textbfAI Hospital, a framework simulating dynamic medical interactions between emphDoctor as player and NPCs.
This setup allows for realistic assessments of LLMs in clinical scenarios.
We develop the Multi-View Medical Evaluation benchmark, utilizing high-quality Chinese medical records and NPCs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-15T06:46:48Z) - LongHealth: A Question Answering Benchmark with Long Clinical Documents [36.05587855811346]
We present the LongHealth benchmark, comprising 20 detailed fictional patient cases across various diseases.
The benchmark challenges LLMs with 400 multiple-choice questions in three categories: information extraction, negation, and sorting.
We evaluated nine open-source LLMs with a minimum of 16,000 tokens and also included OpenAI's proprietary and cost-efficient GPT-3.5 Turbo for comparison.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-25T19:57:00Z) - Adapted Large Language Models Can Outperform Medical Experts in Clinical Text Summarization [8.456700096020601]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in natural language processing (NLP), but their effectiveness on a diverse range of clinical summarization tasks remains unproven.
In this study, we apply adaptation methods to eight LLMs, spanning four distinct clinical summarization tasks.
A clinical reader study with ten physicians evaluates summary, completeness, correctness, and conciseness; in a majority of cases, summaries from our best adapted LLMs are either equivalent (45%) or superior (36%) compared to summaries from medical experts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-14T05:15:01Z) - Retrieving Evidence from EHRs with LLMs: Possibilities and Challenges [18.56314471146199]
Large volume of notes often associated with patients together with time constraints renders manually identifying relevant evidence practically infeasible.
We propose and evaluate a zero-shot strategy for using LLMs as a mechanism to efficiently retrieve and summarize unstructured evidence in patient EHR.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-08T18:44:47Z) - 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) - SPeC: A Soft Prompt-Based Calibration on Performance Variability of
Large Language Model in Clinical Notes Summarization [50.01382938451978]
We introduce a model-agnostic pipeline that employs soft prompts to diminish variance while preserving the advantages of prompt-based summarization.
Experimental findings indicate that our method not only bolsters performance but also effectively curbs variance for various language models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-23T04:47:46Z)
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.