ArticleJAMIA open2024
Structuring medication signeturs as a language regression task: comparison of zero- and few-shot GPT with fine-tuned models.
Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prompt Engineering of Large Language Models for Medication Dose Calculation.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Natural language processing to enhance rheumatoid arthritis care in clinical studies: a scoping review of applications, data, approaches, challenges and future directions.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- A SNAPpy use of large language models: using large language models to classify treatment plans in pediatric acute otitis media.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- On the use of natural language processing to implement the target trial framework using unstructured data from the electronic health record.Global epidemiology · 2025Article
- Parkinsonism in Alzheimer's disease without Lewy bodies in association with nigral neuron loss: A data-driven clinicopathologic study.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Electronic health record textual sources such as medication signeturs (sigs) contain valuable information that is not always available in structured form. Commonly processed through manual annotation, this repetitive and time-consuming task could be fully automated using large language models (LLMs). While most sigs include simple instructions, some include complex patterns. Objectives: We aimed to compare the performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 with smaller fine-tuned models (ClinicalBERT, BlueBERT) in extracting the average daily dose of 2 immunomodulating medications with frequent complex sigs: hydroxychloroquine, and prednisone. Methods: Using manually annotated sigs as the gold standard, we compared the performance of these models in 702 hydroxychloroquine and 22 104 prednisone prescriptions. Results: GPT-4 vastly outperformed all other models for this task at any level of in-context learning. With 100 in-context examples, the model correctly annotates 94% of hydroxychloroquine and 95% of prednisone sigs to within 1 significant digit. Error analysis conducted by 2 additional manual annotators on annotator-model disagreements suggests that the vast majority of disagreements are model errors. Many model errors relate to ambiguous sigs on which there was also frequent annotator disagreement. Discussion: Paired with minimal manual annotation, GPT-4 achieved excellent performance for language regression of complex medication sigs and vastly outperforms GPT-3.5, ClinicalBERT, and BlueBERT. However, the number of in-context examples needed to reach maximum performance was similar to GPT-3.5. Conclusion: LLMs show great potential to rapidly extract structured data from sigs in no-code fashion for clinical and research applications.
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.