Yiliang Zhou

Gongbo Zhang, Qiao Jin, Yiliang Zhou et al.

Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise in summarizing medical evidence. Most recent studies focus on the application of proprietary LLMs. Using proprietary LLMs introduces multiple risk factors, including a lack of transparency and vendor dependency. While open-source LLMs allow better transparency and customization, their performance falls short compared to proprietary ones. In this study, we investigated to what extent fine-tuning open-source LLMs can further improve their performance in summarizing medical evidence. Utilizing a benchmark dataset, MedReview, consisting of 8,161 pairs of systematic reviews and summaries, we fine-tuned three broadly-used, open-sourced LLMs, namely PRIMERA, LongT5, and Llama-2. Overall, the fine-tuned LLMs obtained an increase of 9.89 in ROUGE-L (95% confidence interval: 8.94-10.81), 13.21 in METEOR score (95% confidence interval: 12.05-14.37), and 15.82 in CHRF score (95% confidence interval: 13.89-16.44). The performance of fine-tuned LongT5 is close to GPT-3.5 with zero-shot settings. Furthermore, smaller fine-tuned models sometimes even demonstrated superior performance compared to larger zero-shot models. The above trends of improvement were also manifested in both human and GPT4-simulated evaluations. Our results can be applied to guide model selection for tasks demanding particular domain knowledge, such as medical evidence summarization.

Gregory Holste, Yiliang Zhou, Song Wang et al.

Many real-world image recognition problems, such as diagnostic medical imaging exams, are "long-tailed" $\unicode{x2013}$ there are a few common findings followed by many more relatively rare conditions. In chest radiography, diagnosis is both a long-tailed and multi-label problem, as patients often present with multiple findings simultaneously. While researchers have begun to study the problem of long-tailed learning in medical image recognition, few have studied the interaction of label imbalance and label co-occurrence posed by long-tailed, multi-label disease classification. To engage with the research community on this emerging topic, we conducted an open challenge, CXR-LT, on long-tailed, multi-label thorax disease classification from chest X-rays (CXRs). We publicly release a large-scale benchmark dataset of over 350,000 CXRs, each labeled with at least one of 26 clinical findings following a long-tailed distribution. We synthesize common themes of top-performing solutions, providing practical recommendations for long-tailed, multi-label medical image classification. Finally, we use these insights to propose a path forward involving vision-language foundation models for few- and zero-shot disease classification.

Cong Sun, Kurt Teichman, Yiliang Zhou et al.

In this retrospective study, a dataset was constructed with two parts. The first part included 1,656 synthetic chest radiology reports generated by GPT-4 using specified prompts, with 828 being error-free synthetic reports and 828 containing errors. The second part included 614 reports: 307 error-free reports between 2011 and 2016 from the MIMIC-CXR database and 307 corresponding synthetic reports with errors generated by GPT-4 on the basis of these MIMIC-CXR reports and specified prompts. All errors were categorized into four types: negation, left/right, interval change, and transcription errors. Then, several models, including Llama-3, GPT-4, and BiomedBERT, were refined using zero-shot prompting, few-shot prompting, or fine-tuning strategies. Finally, the performance of these models was evaluated using the F1 score, 95\% confidence interval (CI) and paired-sample t-tests on our constructed dataset, with the prediction results further assessed by radiologists. Using zero-shot prompting, the fine-tuned Llama-3-70B-Instruct model achieved the best performance with the following F1 scores: 0.769 for negation errors, 0.772 for left/right errors, 0.750 for interval change errors, 0.828 for transcription errors, and 0.780 overall. In the real-world evaluation phase, two radiologists reviewed 200 randomly selected reports output by the model. Of these, 99 were confirmed to contain errors detected by the models by both radiologists, and 163 were confirmed to contain model-detected errors by at least one radiologist. Generative LLMs, fine-tuned on synthetic and MIMIC-CXR radiology reports, greatly enhanced error detection in radiology reports.

Shuyan Cheng, Yishu Wei, Yiliang Zhou et al.

Objectives: The vast and complex nature of human genomic sequencing data presents challenges for effective analysis. This review aims to investigate the application of Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) and transformer architectures, in deciphering genomic codes, focusing on tokenization, transformer models, and regulatory annotation prediction. The goal of this review is to assess data and model accessibility in the most recent literature, gaining a better understanding of the existing capabilities and constraints of these tools in processing genomic sequencing data. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, our scoping review was conducted across PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and ACM Digital Library. Studies were included if they focused on NLP methodologies applied to genomic sequencing data analysis, without restrictions on publication date or article type. Results: A total of 26 studies published between 2021 and April 2024 were selected for review. The review highlights that tokenization and transformer models enhance the processing and understanding of genomic data, with applications in predicting regulatory annotations like transcription-factor binding sites and chromatin accessibility. Discussion: The application of NLP and LLMs to genomic sequencing data interpretation is a promising field that can help streamline the processing of large-scale genomic data while also providing a better understanding of its complex structures. It has the potential to drive advancements in personalized medicine by offering more efficient and scalable solutions for genomic analysis. Further research is also needed to discuss and overcome current limitations, enhancing model transparency and applicability.

Mingquan Lin, Gregory Holste, Song Wang et al.

The CXR-LT series is a community-driven initiative designed to enhance lung disease classification using chest X-rays (CXR). It tackles challenges in open long-tailed lung disease classification and enhances the measurability of state-of-the-art techniques. The first event, CXR-LT 2023, aimed to achieve these goals by providing high-quality benchmark CXR data for model development and conducting comprehensive evaluations to identify ongoing issues impacting lung disease classification performance. Building on the success of CXR-LT 2023, the CXR-LT 2024 expands the dataset to 377,110 chest X-rays (CXRs) and 45 disease labels, including 19 new rare disease findings. It also introduces a new focus on zero-shot learning to address limitations identified in the previous event. Specifically, CXR-LT 2024 features three tasks: (i) long-tailed classification on a large, noisy test set, (ii) long-tailed classification on a manually annotated "gold standard" subset, and (iii) zero-shot generalization to five previously unseen disease findings. This paper provides an overview of CXR-LT 2024, detailing the data curation process and consolidating state-of-the-art solutions, including the use of multimodal models for rare disease detection, advanced generative approaches to handle noisy labels, and zero-shot learning strategies for unseen diseases. Additionally, the expanded dataset enhances disease coverage to better represent real-world clinical settings, offering a valuable resource for future research. By synthesizing the insights and innovations of participating teams, we aim to advance the development of clinically realistic and generalizable diagnostic models for chest radiography.

Gongbo Zhang, Yiliang Zhou, Yan Hu et al.

Objectives Extraction of PICO (Populations, Interventions, Comparison, and Outcomes) entities is fundamental to evidence retrieval. We present a novel method PICOX to extract overlapping PICO entities. Materials and Methods PICOX first identifies entities by assessing whether a word marks the beginning or conclusion of an entity. Then it uses a multi-label classifier to assign one or more PICO labels to a span candidate. PICOX was evaluated using one of the best-performing baselines, EBM-NLP, and three more datasets, i.e., PICO-Corpus, and RCT publications on Alzheimer's Disease or COVID-19, using entity-level precision, recall, and F1 scores. Results PICOX achieved superior precision, recall, and F1 scores across the board, with the micro F1 score improving from 45.05 to 50.87 (p << 0.01). On the PICO-Corpus, PICOX obtained higher recall and F1 scores than the baseline and improved the micro recall score from 56.66 to 67.33. On the COVID-19 dataset, PICOX also outperformed the baseline and improved the micro F1 score from 77.10 to 80.32. On the AD dataset, PICOX demonstrated comparable F1 scores with higher precision when compared to the baseline. Conclusion PICOX excels in identifying overlapping entities and consistently surpasses a leading baseline across multiple datasets. Ablation studies reveal that its data augmentation strategy effectively minimizes false positives and improves precision.

Yiliang Zhou, Di Hu, Tianchu Lyu et al.

Stigmatizing language results in healthcare inequities, yet there is no universally accepted or standardized lexicon defining which words, terms, or phrases constitute stigmatizing language in healthcare. We conducted a systematic search of the literature to identify existing stigmatizing language lexicons and then analyzed them comparatively to examine: 1) similarities and discrepancies between these lexicons, and 2) the distribution of positive, negative, or neutral terms based on an established sentiment dataset. Our search identified four lexicons. The analysis results revealed moderate semantic similarity among them, and that most stigmatizing terms are related to judgmental expressions by clinicians to describe perceived negative behaviors. Sentiment analysis showed a predominant proportion of negatively classified terms, though variations exist across lexicons. Our findings underscore the need for a standardized lexicon and highlight challenges in defining stigmatizing language in clinical texts.