ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Fine-tuning Large Language Models for Rare Disease Concept Normalization.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: We aim to develop a novel method for rare disease concept normalization by fine-tuning Llama 2, an open-source large language model (LLM), using a domain-specific corpus sourced from the Human Phenotype Ontology (HPO). Methods: We developed an in-house template-based script to generate two corpora for fine-tuning. The first (NAME) contains standardized HPO names, sourced from the HPO vocabularies, along with their corresponding identifiers. The second (NAME+SYN) includes HPO names and half of the concept's synonyms as well as identifiers. Subsequently, we fine-tuned Llama2 (Llama2-7B) for each sentence set and conducted an evaluation using a range of sentence prompts and various phenotype terms. Results: When the phenotype terms for normalization were included in the fine-tuning corpora, both models demonstrated nearly perfect performance, averaging over 99% accuracy. In comparison, ChatGPT-3.5 has only ~20% accuracy in identifying HPO IDs for phenotype terms. When single-character typos were introduced in the phenotype terms, the accuracy of NAME and NAME+SYN is 10.2% and 36.1%, respectively, but increases to 61.8% (NAME+SYN) with additional typo-specific fine-tuning. For terms sourced from HPO vocabularies as unseen synonyms, the NAME model achieved 11.2% accuracy, while the NAME+SYN model achieved 92.7% accuracy. Conclusion: Our fine-tuned models demonstrate ability to normalize phenotype terms unseen in the fine-tuning corpus, including misspellings, synonyms, terms from other ontologies, and laymen's terms. Our approach provides a solution for the use of LLM to identify named medical entities from the clinical narratives, while successfully normalizing them to standard concepts in a controlled vocabulary.
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.