Comparative Analysis of Open-Source Language Models in Summarizing Medical Text Data

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.16295v3
• Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 20:40:32 GMT
• Title: Comparative Analysis of Open-Source Language Models in Summarizing Medical Text Data
• Authors: Yuhao Chen, Zhimu Wang, Bo Wen, Farhana Zulkernine,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated superior performance in question answering and summarization tasks on unstructured text data. We propose an evaluation approach to analyze the performance of open-source LLMs for medical summarization tasks.
• Score: 5.443548415516227
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Unstructured text in medical notes and dialogues contains rich information. Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated superior performance in question answering and summarization tasks on unstructured text data, outperforming traditional text analysis approaches. However, there is a lack of scientific studies in the literature that methodically evaluate and report on the performance of different LLMs, specifically for domain-specific data such as medical chart notes. We propose an evaluation approach to analyze the performance of open-source LLMs such as Llama2 and Mistral for medical summarization tasks, using GPT-4 as an assessor. Our innovative approach to quantitative evaluation of LLMs can enable quality control, support the selection of effective LLMs for specific tasks, and advance knowledge discovery in digital health.

Related papers

• Systematic Task Exploration with LLMs: A Study in Citation Text Generation [63.50597360948099]
  Large language models (LLMs) bring unprecedented flexibility in defining and executing complex, creative natural language generation (NLG) tasks. We propose a three-component research framework that consists of systematic input manipulation, reference data, and output measurement. We use this framework to explore citation text generation -- a popular scholarly NLP task that lacks consensus on the task definition and evaluation metric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T16:41:08Z)
• SemioLLM: Assessing Large Language Models for Semiological Analysis in Epilepsy Research [45.2233252981348]
  Large Language Models have shown promising results in their ability to encode general medical knowledge. We test the ability of state-of-the-art LLMs to leverage their internal knowledge and reasoning for epilepsy diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T11:02:12Z)
• MedExQA: Medical Question Answering Benchmark with Multiple Explanations [2.2246416434538308]
  This paper introduces MedExQA, a novel benchmark in medical question-answering to evaluate large language models' (LLMs) understanding of medical knowledge through explanations. By constructing datasets across five distinct medical specialties, we address a major gap in current medical QA benchmarks. Our work highlights the importance of explainability in medical LLMs, proposes an effective methodology for evaluating models beyond classification accuracy, and sheds light on one specific domain, speech language pathology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-10T14:47:04Z)
• Attribute Structuring Improves LLM-Based Evaluation of Clinical Text Summaries [62.32403630651586]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to generate accurate clinical text summaries, but still struggle with issues regarding grounding and evaluation. Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using Attribute Structuring (AS), which structures the summary evaluation process. AS consistently improves the correspondence between human annotations and automated metrics in clinical text summarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-01T21:59:03Z)
• Large Language Models Illuminate a Progressive Pathway to Artificial Healthcare Assistant: A Review [16.008511195589925]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising capabilities in mimicking human-level language comprehension and reasoning. This paper provides a comprehensive review on the applications and implications of LLMs in medicine.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T13:51:36Z)
• BLESS: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Sentence Simplification [55.461555829492866]
  We present BLESS, a performance benchmark of the most recent state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) on the task of text simplification (TS) We assess a total of 44 models, differing in size, architecture, pre-training methods, and accessibility, on three test sets from different domains (Wikipedia, news, and medical) under a few-shot setting. Our evaluation indicates that the best LLMs, despite not being trained on TS, perform comparably with state-of-the-art TS baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T12:18:17Z)
• 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)
• Interpretable Medical Diagnostics with Structured Data Extraction by Large Language Models [59.89454513692417]
  Tabular data is often hidden in text, particularly in medical diagnostic reports. We propose a novel, simple, and effective methodology for extracting structured tabular data from textual medical reports, called TEMED-LLM. We demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms state-of-the-art text classification models in medical diagnostics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T09:12:28Z)
• 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)
• Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Check [69.97942065617664]
  This paper investigates the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in performing various sentiment analysis tasks. We evaluate performance across 13 tasks on 26 datasets and compare the results against small language models (SLMs) trained on domain-specific datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T10:45:25Z)
• A systematic evaluation of large language models for biomedical natural language processing: benchmarks, baselines, and recommendations [22.668383945059762]
  We present a systematic evaluation of four representative Large Language Models (LLMs) across 12 BioNLP datasets. The evaluation is conducted under four settings: zero-shot, static few-shot, dynamic K-nearest few-shot, and fine-tuning. We compare these models against state-of-the-art (SOTA) approaches that fine-tune (domain-specific) BERT or BART models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-10T13:40:06Z)

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.