Rishi J Desai

Jiageng Wu, Bowen Gu, Ren Zhou et al. · harvard, mit

Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise for medical applications and are evolving rapidly, with new models being released at an accelerated pace. However, benchmarking on large-scale real-world data such as electronic health records (EHRs) is critical, as clinical decisions are directly informed by these sources, yet current evaluations remain limited. Most existing benchmarks rely on medical exam-style questions or PubMed-derived text, failing to capture the complexity of real-world clinical data. Others focus narrowly on specific application scenarios, limiting their generalizability across broader clinical use. To address this gap, we present BRIDGE, a comprehensive multilingual benchmark comprising 87 tasks sourced from real-world clinical data sources across nine languages. It covers eight major task types spanning the entire continuum of patient care across six clinical stages and 20 representative applications, including triage and referral, consultation, information extraction, diagnosis, prognosis, and billing coding, and involves 14 clinical specialties. We systematically evaluated 95 LLMs (including DeepSeek-R1, GPT-4o, Gemini series, and Qwen3 series) under various inference strategies. Our results reveal substantial performance variation across model sizes, languages, natural language processing tasks, and clinical specialties. Notably, we demonstrate that open-source LLMs can achieve performance comparable to proprietary models, while medically fine-tuned LLMs based on older architectures often underperform versus updated general-purpose models. The BRIDGE and its corresponding leaderboard serve as a foundational resource and a unique reference for the development and evaluation of new LLMs in real-world clinical text understanding. The BRIDGE leaderboard: https://huggingface.co/spaces/YLab-Open/BRIDGE-Medical-Leaderboard

Shirley V Wang, Georg Hahn, Sushama Kattinakere Sreedhara et al.

Background: One of the ways to enhance analyses conducted with large claims databases is by validating the measurement characteristics of code-based algorithms used to identify health outcomes or other key study parameters of interest. These metrics can be used in quantitative bias analyses to assess the robustness of results for an inferential study given potential bias from outcome misclassification. However, extensive time and resource allocation are typically re-quired to create reference-standard labels through manual chart review of free-text notes from linked electronic health records. Methods: We describe an expedited process that introduces efficiency in a validation study us-ing two distinct mechanisms: 1) use of natural language processing (NLP) to reduce time spent by human reviewers to review each chart, and 2) a multi-wave adaptive sampling approach with pre-defined criteria to stop the validation study once performance characteristics are identified with sufficient precision. We illustrate this process in a case study that validates the performance of a claims-based outcome algorithm for intentional self-harm in patients with obesity. Results: We empirically demonstrate that the NLP-assisted annotation process reduced the time spent on review per chart by 40% and use of the pre-defined stopping rule with multi-wave samples would have prevented review of 77% of patient charts with limited compromise to precision in derived measurement characteristics. Conclusion: This approach could facilitate more routine validation of code-based algorithms used to define key study parameters, ultimately enhancing understanding of the reliability of find-ings derived from database studies.