Meirong Du

Hyunjae Kim, Dain Kim, Pan Xiao et al.

Medicine is inherently multimodal, requiring clinicians to synthesize information across diverse data streams. Yet the development of multimodal foundation models is constrained by limited access to large-scale, high-quality clinical data. Although PubMed Central (PMC) offers a complementary source of expert-authored image-text data, existing PMC-derived resources remain limited in fidelity, reproducibility, and clinical validation. We introduce MedPMC, an automated, continuously updatable framework that transforms permissively licensed literature into high-fidelity infrastructure for medical multimodal models. Applied to 6.1 million PMC articles, MedPMC curated 11 million medical image-text pairs. Component evaluations showed strong performance for initial screening (F1 = 93.2), multi-panel figure detection (F1 = 96.5), figure separation (mAP = 89.8), caption separation and alignment (F1 = 81.4; ROUGE-L = 85.3), and medical figure classification (F1 = 96.5). Manual review by five annotators, three with medical training, found 95.3% of MedPMC images medically relevant, versus 19.7% in a prior PMC-derived dataset. Across 26 benchmarks spanning 11 specialties, a MedPMC-trained CLIP-style model improved average zero-shot AUC by 7.1 percentage points over the strongest architecture-matched biomedical CLIP baseline despite using fewer than half as many image-text pairs. As the vision encoder in a multimodal large language model, it improved medical visual question-answering by 1.9 and 16.9 percentage points across two benchmarks. In 10,524 Yale New Haven Health System dermatology photographs, it improved morphology-to-image retrieval Recall@5 by 11.7 percentage points. These findings show that high-fidelity literature curation strengthens medical multimodal foundation models across benchmark and clinical settings. We publicly release the framework, corpus, benchmarks, and pretrained models.

Anran Li, Lingfei Qian, Mengmeng Du et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in medicine. To date, LLMs have been widely applied to tasks such as diagnostic assistance, medical question answering, and clinical information synthesis. However, a key open question remains: to what extent do LLMs memorize medical training data. In this study, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of memorization of LLMs in medicine, assessing its prevalence (how frequently it occurs), characteristics (what is memorized), volume (how much content is memorized), and potential downstream impacts (how memorization may affect medical applications). We systematically analyze common adaptation scenarios: (1) continued pretraining on medical corpora, (2) fine-tuning on standard medical benchmarks, and (3) fine-tuning on real-world clinical data, including over 13,000 unique inpatient records from Yale New Haven Health System. The results demonstrate that memorization is prevalent across all adaptation scenarios and significantly higher than reported in the general domain. Memorization affects both the development and adoption of LLMs in medicine and can be categorized into three types: beneficial (e.g., accurate recall of clinical guidelines and biomedical references), uninformative (e.g., repeated disclaimers or templated medical document language), and harmful (e.g., regeneration of dataset-specific or sensitive clinical content). Based on these findings, we offer practical recommendations to facilitate beneficial memorization that enhances domain-specific reasoning and factual accuracy, minimize uninformative memorization to promote deeper learning beyond surface-level patterns, and mitigate harmful memorization to prevent the leakage of sensitive or identifiable patient information.