ArticlePLOS digital health2024
Biomedical text readability after hypernym substitution with fine-tuned large language models.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating GPT-4 Responses on Scars or Keloids for Patient Education: Large Language Model Evaluation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- The Development Landscape of Large Language Models for Biomedical Applications.Annual review of biomedical data science · 2025Review
- Clinical insights: A comprehensive review of language models in medicine.PLOS digital health · 2025Review
- Evaluating Quality and Readability of AI-generated Information on Living Kidney Donation.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- Large language models in oncology: a review.BMJ oncology · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of patient access to complex medical information online has highlighted the need for simplification of biomedical text to improve patient understanding and engagement in taking ownership of their health. However, comprehension of biomedical text remains a difficult task due to the need for domain-specific expertise. We aimed to study the simplification of biomedical text via large language models (LLMs) commonly used for general natural language processing tasks involve text comprehension, summarization, generation, and prediction of new text from prompts. Specifically, we finetuned three variants of large language models to perform substitutions of complex words and word phrases in biomedical text with a related hypernym. The output of the text substitution process using LLMs was evaluated by comparing the pre- and post-substitution texts using four readability metrics and two measures of sentence complexity. A sample of 1,000 biomedical definitions in the National Library of Medicine's Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) was processed with three LLM approaches, and each showed an improvement in readability and sentence complexity after hypernym substitution. Readability scores were translated from a pre-processed collegiate reading level to a post-processed US high-school level. Comparison between the three LLMs showed that the GPT-J-6b approach had the best improvement in measures of sentence complexity. This study demonstrates the merit of hypernym substitution to improve readability of complex biomedical text for the public and highlights the use case for fine-tuning open-access large language models for biomedical natural language processing.
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.