Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38010803›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2023

A Large Language Model Screening Tool to Target Patients for Best Practice Alerts: Development and Validation.

Thomas Savage, John Wang, Lisa Shieh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Large Language Models in Gastroenterology: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Evaluating large language models on hospital health data for automated emergency triage.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Thomas SavageDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4828-5802
John WangDivison of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8515-5014
Lisa ShiehDivision of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2729-315X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBest Practice Alerts (BPAs) are alert messages to physicians in the electronic health record that are used to encourage appropriate use of health care resources. While these alerts are helpful in both improving care and reducing costs, BPAs are often broadly applied nonselectively across entire patient populations. The development of large language models (LLMs) provides an opportunity to selectively identify patients for BPAs.

objectiveIn this paper, we present an example case where an LLM screening tool is used to select patients appropriate for a BPA encouraging the prescription of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) anticoagulation prophylaxis. The artificial intelligence (AI) screening tool was developed to identify patients experiencing acute bleeding and exclude them from receiving a DVT prophylaxis BPA.

methodsOur AI screening tool used a BioMed-RoBERTa (Robustly Optimized Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers Pretraining Approach; AllenAI) model to perform classification of physician notes, identifying patients without active bleeding and thus appropriate for a thromboembolism prophylaxis BPA. The BioMed-RoBERTa model was fine-tuned using 500 history and physical notes of patients from the MIMIC-III (Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care) database who were not prescribed anticoagulation. A development set of 300 MIMIC patient notes was used to determine the model's hyperparameters, and a separate test set of 300 patient notes was used to evaluate the screening tool.

resultsOur MIMIC-III test set population of 300 patients included 72 patients with bleeding (ie, were not appropriate for a DVT prophylaxis BPA) and 228 without bleeding who were appropriate for a DVT prophylaxis BPA. The AI screening tool achieved impressive accuracy with a precision-recall area under the curve of 0.82 (95% CI 0.75-0.89) and a receiver operator curve area under the curve of 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.94). The screening tool reduced the number of patients who would trigger an alert by 20% (240 instead of 300 alerts) and increased alert applicability by 14.8% (218 [90.8%] positive alerts from 240 total alerts instead of 228 [76%] positive alerts from 300 total alerts), compared to nonselectively sending alerts for all patients.

conclusionsThese results show a proof of concept on how language models can be used as a screening tool for BPAs. We provide an example AI screening tool that uses a HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)-compliant BioMed-RoBERTa model deployed with minimal computing power. Larger models (eg, Generative Pre-trained Transformers-3, Generative Pre-trained Transformers-4, and Pathways Language Model) will exhibit superior performance but require data use agreements to be HIPAA compliant. We anticipate LLMs to revolutionize quality improvement in hospital medicine.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEHRhealth recordhealth recordslanguage modellanguage modelslarge language modelsNatural Language Processingquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID38010803
PMCPMC10714262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.