Dataset Information

Evaluating large language models on medical evidence summarization.

ABSTRACT: Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable successes in zero- and few-shot performance on various downstream tasks, paving the way for applications in high-stakes domains. In this study, we systematically examine the capabilities and limitations of LLMs, specifically GPT-3.5 and ChatGPT, in performing zero-shot medical evidence summarization across six clinical domains. We conduct both automatic and human evaluations, covering several dimensions of summary quality. Our study demonstrates that automatic metrics often do not strongly correlate with the quality of summaries. Furthermore, informed by our human evaluations, we define a terminology of error types for medical evidence summarization. Our findings reveal that LLMs could be susceptible to generating factually inconsistent summaries and making overly convincing or uncertain statements, leading to potential harm due to misinformation. Moreover, we find that models struggle to identify the salient information and are more error-prone when summarizing over longer textual contexts.

SUBMITTER: Tang L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10449915 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluating large language models on medical evidence summarization.

Tang Liyan L Sun Zhaoyi Z Idnay Betina B Nestor Jordan G JG Soroush Ali A Elias Pierre A PA Xu Ziyang Z Ding Ying Y Durrett Greg G Rousseau Justin F JF Weng Chunhua C Peng Yifan Y

NPJ digital medicine 20230824 1

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable successes in zero- and few-shot performance on various downstream tasks, paving the way for applications in high-stakes domains. In this study, we systematically examine the capabilities and limitations of LLMs, specifically GPT-3.5 and ChatGPT, in performing zero-shot medical evidence summarization across six clinical domains. We conduct both automatic and human evaluations, covering several dimensions of summary quali ...[more]

PMID: 37620423

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have accelerated their use across various domains. Psychiatric interviews, which are goal-oriented and structured, represent a significantly underexplored area where LLMs can provide substantial value. In this study, we explore the application of LLMs to enhance psychiatric interviews by analyzing counseling data from North Korean defectors who have experienced traumatic events and mental health issues.ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate whether LLMs can (1) delineate parts of the conversation that suggest psychiatric symptoms and identify those symptoms, and (2) summarize stressors and symptoms based on the interview dialogue transcript.MethodsGiven the interview transcripts, we align the LLMs to perform 3 tasks: (1) extracting stressors from the transcripts, (2) delineating symptoms and their indicative sections, and (3) summarizing the patients based on the extracted stressors and symptoms. These 3 tasks address the 2 objectives, where delineating symptoms is based on the output from the second task, and generating the summary of the interview incorporates the outputs from all 3 tasks. In this context, the transcript data were labeled by mental health experts for the training and evaluation of the LLMs.ResultsFirst, we present the performance of LLMs in estimating (1) the transcript sections related to psychiatric symptoms and (2) the names of the corresponding symptoms. In the zero-shot inference setting using the GPT-4 Turbo model, 73 out of 102 transcript segments demonstrated a recall mid-token distance d<20 for estimating the sections associated with the symptoms. For evaluating the names of the corresponding symptoms, the fine-tuning method demonstrates a performance advantage over the zero-shot inference setting of the GPT-4 Turbo model. On average, the fine-tuning method achieves an accuracy of 0.82, a precision of 0.83, a recall of 0.82, and an F1-score of 0.82. Second, the transcripts are used to generate summaries for each interviewee using LLMs. This generative task was evaluated using metrics such as Generative Evaluation (G-Eval) and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers Score (BERTScore). The summaries generated by the GPT-4 Turbo model, utilizing both symptom and stressor information, achieve high average G-Eval scores: coherence of 4.66, consistency of 4.73, fluency of 2.16, and relevance of 4.67. Furthermore, it is noted that the use of retrieval-augmented generation did not lead to a significant improvement in performance.ConclusionsLLMs, using either (1) appropriate prompting techniques or (2) fine-tuning methods with data labeled by mental health experts, achieved an accuracy of over 0.8 for the symptom delineation task when measured across all segments in the transcript. Additionally, they attained a G-Eval score of over 4.6 for coherence in the summarization task. This research contributes to the emerging field of applying LLMs in psychiatric interviews and demonstrates their potential effectiveness in assisting mental health practitioners.

Dataset Information

Evaluating large language models on medical evidence summarization.

Publications

Evaluating large language models on medical evidence summarization.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets