arXiv Machine Learning By Martin Murin

Measuring the sensitivity of LLM-based structured extraction to prompt, model, and schema choices in clinical discharge summaries

Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →

arXiv:2606. 05970v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used for structured extraction from clinical free-text notes, but the sensitivity of their output to upstream configuration choices is less understood than their accuracy on fixed benchmarks.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 25

Clinical Intent Extraction: A FHIR-Aligned Representation and the CIRCA Benchmark

The paper introduces Clinical Intent Extraction (CIE), a task that transforms fragmented clinical action annotations into complete structured records called Clinical Intent Representation (CIR). CIR decomposes each action into verb, type, coded target, timing, condition, request‑intent (aligned to HL7 FHIR) and modality, adding dimensions absent in prior datasets. By re‑expressing five heterogeneous corpora into CIR, the authors create CIRCA, a benchmark of 10,011 harmonized intents with human‑validated subsets, crosswalks, and a deterministic FHIR R4 mapper, and demonstrate that existing models perform poorly on the full task, highlighting the need for targeted development.

By Alexander Apartsin, Yehudit Aperstein
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 24

An ambiguity taxonomy for evaluating large language model performance on clinical registry abstraction: a multi-site prospective study

The study evaluates large language models (LLMs) on unprocessed electronic medical record data for clinical registry abstraction, focusing on the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry. In a pilot at one academic center, the LLM identified candidate data sources for each registry question, which abstractors used to define question‑specific document sets. In a subsequent validation at a second center, the LLM answered 157 registry questions with an overall mean accuracy of 91.5%, but accuracy dropped from 96% for simple medication or event flag questions to 62% for event timing questions, reflecting increasing ambiguity and required clinical reasoning.

By James Matheson, Betsy Castillo, Andrew Y. Shin, David Scheinker
arXiv AI
Aug 19

Institution-Specific LLM Prompting Recovers PHI That De-identification Systems and Their Gold Standards Both Miss

The study evaluates whether large language models (LLMs) with in‑context learning can better identify institution‑specific protected health information (PHI) in electronic health records than existing de‑identification systems. Using 100 pediatric oncology notes from Texas Children’s Hospital, eight LLMs were compared to two purpose‑built systems and pattern‑based baselines under three progressively specific prompts. The best LLM achieved an F1 score of 0.918, recovering 79% of previously missed PHI categories and reaching a recall of 0.981 after iterative prompt refinement, demonstrating that calibrated single‑pass prompting can close the institutional PHI gap while balancing precision and recall.

By Daniel Palacios, Matthew Brady Neeley, Angel Adetomike Otto, Shalini Dhamodharan, John P. Woodhouse, Chi-fan Lin, Mark Zobeck, Zhandong Liu, Hyun-Hwan Jeong