6.7AINov 19, 2023
Leveraging Generative AI for Clinical Evidence Summarization Needs to Ensure TrustworthinessGongbo Zhang, Qiao Jin, Denis Jered McInerney et al. · amazon-science, salesforce
Evidence-based medicine promises to improve the quality of healthcare by empowering medical decisions and practices with the best available evidence. The rapid growth of medical evidence, which can be obtained from various sources, poses a challenge in collecting, appraising, and synthesizing the evidential information. Recent advancements in generative AI, exemplified by large language models, hold promise in facilitating the arduous task. However, developing accountable, fair, and inclusive models remains a complicated undertaking. In this perspective, we discuss the trustworthiness of generative AI in the context of automated summarization of medical evidence.
2.7CLAug 19, 2025
Scalable Scientific Interest Profiling Using Large Language ModelsYilun Liang, Gongbo Zhang, Edward Sun et al.
Research profiles help surface scientists' expertise but are often outdated. We develop and evaluate two large language model-based methods to generate scientific interest profiles: one summarizing PubMed abstracts and one using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms, and compare them with researchers' self-written profiles. We assembled titles, MeSH terms, and abstracts for 595 faculty at Columbia University Irving Medical Center; self-authored profiles were available for 167. Using GPT-4o-mini, we generated profiles and assessed them with automatic metrics and blinded human review. Lexical overlap with self-written profiles was low (ROUGE-L, BLEU, METEOR), while BERTScore indicated moderate semantic similarity (F1: 0.542 for MeSH-based; 0.555 for abstract-based). Paraphrased references yielded 0.851, highlighting metric sensitivity. TF-IDF Kullback-Leibler divergence (8.56 for MeSH-based; 8.58 for abstract-based) suggested distinct keyword choices. In manual review, 77.78 percent of MeSH-based profiles were rated good or excellent, readability was favored in 93.44 percent of cases, and panelists preferred MeSH-based over abstract-based profiles in 67.86 percent of comparisons. Overall, large language models can generate researcher profiles at scale; MeSH-derived profiles tend to be more readable than abstract-derived ones. Machine-generated and self-written profiles differ conceptually, with human summaries introducing more novel ideas.
2.7CLJun 3, 2025
EvidenceOutcomes: a Dataset of Clinical Trial Publications with Clinically Meaningful OutcomesYiliang Zhou, Abigail M. Newbury, Gongbo Zhang et al.
The fundamental process of evidence extraction and synthesis in evidence-based medicine involves extracting PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) elements from biomedical literature. However, Outcomes, being the most complex elements, are often neglected or oversimplified in existing benchmarks. To address this issue, we present EvidenceOutcomes, a novel, large, annotated corpus of clinically meaningful outcomes extracted from biomedical literature. We first developed a robust annotation guideline for extracting clinically meaningful outcomes from text through iteration and discussion with clinicians and Natural Language Processing experts. Then, three independent annotators annotated the Results and Conclusions sections of a randomly selected sample of 500 PubMed abstracts and 140 PubMed abstracts from the existing EBM-NLP corpus. This resulted in EvidenceOutcomes with high-quality annotations of an inter-rater agreement of 0.76. Additionally, our fine-tuned PubMedBERT model, applied to these 500 PubMed abstracts, achieved an F1-score of 0.69 at the entity level and 0.76 at the token level on the subset of 140 PubMed abstracts from the EBM-NLP corpus. EvidenceOutcomes can serve as a shared benchmark to develop and test future machine learning algorithms to extract clinically meaningful outcomes from biomedical abstracts.
1.0CLDec 26, 2024
Semi-Supervised Learning from Small Annotated Data and Large Unlabeled Data for Fine-grained PICO Entity RecognitionFangyi Chen, Gongbo Zhang, Yilu Fang et al.
Objective: Extracting PICO elements -- Participants, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes -- from clinical trial literature is essential for clinical evidence retrieval, appraisal, and synthesis. Existing approaches do not distinguish the attributes of PICO entities. This study aims to develop a named entity recognition (NER) model to extract PICO entities with fine granularities. Materials and Methods: Using a corpus of 2,511 abstracts with PICO mentions from 4 public datasets, we developed a semi-supervised method to facilitate the training of a NER model, FinePICO, by combining limited annotated data of PICO entities and abundant unlabeled data. For evaluation, we divided the entire dataset into two subsets: a smaller group with annotations and a larger group without annotations. We then established the theoretical lower and upper performance bounds based on the performance of supervised learning models trained solely on the small, annotated subset and on the entire set with complete annotations, respectively. Finally, we evaluated FinePICO on both the smaller annotated subset and the larger, initially unannotated subset. We measured the performance of FinePICO using precision, recall, and F1. Results: Our method achieved precision/recall/F1 of 0.567/0.636/0.60, respectively, using a small set of annotated samples, outperforming the baseline model (F1: 0.437) by more than 16\%. The model demonstrates generalizability to a different PICO framework and to another corpus, which consistently outperforms the benchmark in diverse experimental settings (p-value \textless0.001). Conclusion: This study contributes a generalizable and effective semi-supervised approach to named entity recognition leveraging large unlabeled data together with small, annotated data. It also initially supports fine-grained PICO extraction.