ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2023
One LLM is not Enough: Harnessing the Power of Ensemble Learning for Medical Question Answering.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient and accurate medical AI: MediLore and MediOut.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Benchmarking the Confidence of Large Language Models in Answering Clinical Questions: Cross-Sectional Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To enhance the accuracy and reliability of diverse medical question-answering (QA) tasks and investigate efficient approaches deploying the Large Language Models (LLM) technologies, We developed a novel ensemble learning pipeline by utilizing state-of-the-art LLMs, focusing on improving performance on diverse medical QA datasets. Materials and Methods: Our study employs three medical QA datasets: PubMedQA, MedQA-USMLE, and MedMCQA, each presenting unique challenges in biomedical question-answering. The proposed LLM-Synergy framework, focusing exclusively on zero-shot cases using LLMs, incorporates two primary ensemble methods. The first is a Boosting-based weighted majority vote ensemble, where decision-making is expedited and refined by assigning variable weights to different LLMs through a boosting algorithm. The second method is Cluster-based Dynamic Model Selection, which dynamically selects the most suitable LLM votes for each query, based on the characteristics of question contexts, using a clustering approach. Results: The Majority Weighted Vote and Dynamic Model Selection methods demonstrate superior performance compared to individual LLMs across three medical QA datasets. Specifically, the accuracies are 35.84%, 96.21%, and 37.26% for MedMCQA, PubMedQA, and MedQA-USMLE, respectively, with the Majority Weighted Vote. Correspondingly, the Dynamic Model Selection yields slightly higher accuracies of 38.01%, 96.36%, and 38.13%. Conclusion: The LLM-Synergy framework with two ensemble methods, represents a significant advancement in leveraging LLMs for medical QA tasks and provides an innovative way of efficiently utilizing the development with LLM Technologies, customing for both existing and potentially future challenge tasks in biomedical and health informatics research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.