ArticleDrug safety2025
Performance and Reproducibility of Large Language Models in Named Entity Recognition: Considerations for the Use in Controlled Environments.
Article in Drug safety, 2025. 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.
- Large Language Models in Adverse Drug Reaction Detection and Pharmacovigilance: A Systematic Review of Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- GLiNER-BioMed: a suite of efficient models for open biomedical named entity recognition.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Two-Stage Wildlife Event Classification for Edge Deployment.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A review for navigating the trade-offs: evaluating open-source and proprietary large language models for clinical and biomedical information extraction.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Article
- Diagnostic performance of four AI tools in pharmacology MCQs: Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRecent artificial intelligence (AI) advances can generate human-like responses to a wide range of queries, making them a useful tool for healthcare applications. Therefore, the potential use of large language models (LLMs) in controlled environments regarding efficacy, reproducibility, and operability will be of paramount interest.
objectiveWe investigated if and how GPT 3.5 and GPT 4 models can be directly used as a part of a GxP validated system and compared the performance of externally hosted GPT 3.5 and GPT 4 against LLMs, which can be hosted internally. We explored zero-shot LLM performance for named entity recognition (NER) and relation extraction tasks, investigated which LLM has the best zero-shot performance to be used potentially for generating training data proposals, evaluated the LLM performance of seven entities for medical NER in zero-shot experiments, selected one model for further performance improvement (few-shot and fine-tuning: Zephyr-7b-beta), and investigated how smaller open-source LLMs perform in contrast to GPT models and to a small fine-tuned T5 Base.
methodsWe performed reproducibility experiments to evaluate if LLMs can be used in controlled environments and utilized guided generation to use the same prompt across multiple models. Few-shot learning and quantized low rank adapter (QLoRA) fine-tuning were applied to further improve LLM performance. RESULTS AND
conclusionWe demonstrated that zero-shot GPT 4 performance is comparable with a fine-tuned T5, and Zephyr performed better than zero-shot GPT 3.5, but the recognition of product combinations such as product event combination was significantly better by using a fine-tuned T5. Although Open AI launched recently GPT versions to improve the generation of consistent output, both GPT variants failed to demonstrate reproducible results. The lack of reproducibility together with limitations of external hosted systems to keep validated systems in a state of control may affect the use of closed and proprietary models in regulated environments. However, due to the good NER performance, we recommend using GPT for creating annotation proposals for training data as a basis for fine-tuning.
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.