Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39746191›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2025

The Transformative Potential of Large Language Models in Mining Electronic Health Records Data: Content Analysis.

Amadeo Jesus Wals Zurita, Hector Miras Del Rio, Nerea Ugarte Ruiz de Aguirre, Cristina Nebrera Navarro, Maria Rubio Jimenez, David Muñoz Carmona, Carlos Miguez Sanchez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Amadeo Jesus Wals ZuritaServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8869-1015
Hector Miras Del RioServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0534-3657
Nerea Ugarte Ruiz de AguirreServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0009-0009-8381-6913
Cristina Nebrera NavarroServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0009-0001-6771-4003
Maria Rubio JimenezServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0009-0004-5920-9332
David Muñoz CarmonaServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2460-6309
Carlos Miguez SanchezServicio Oncologia Radioterápica, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Andalusian Health Service, Seville, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3151-8860

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn this study, we evaluate the accuracy, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of large language models in extracting and structuring information from free-text clinical reports, particularly in identifying and classifying patient comorbidities within oncology electronic health records. We specifically compare the performance of gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 and gpt-4-1106-preview models against that of specialized human evaluators.

objectiveWe specifically compare the performance of gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 and gpt-4-1106-preview models against that of specialized human evaluators.

methodsWe implemented a script using the OpenAI application programming interface to extract structured information in JavaScript object notation format from comorbidities reported in 250 personal history reports. These reports were manually reviewed in batches of 50 by 5 specialists in radiation oncology. We compared the results using metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, precision, accuracy, F-value, κ index, and the McNemar test, in addition to examining the common causes of errors in both humans and generative pretrained transformer (GPT) models.

resultsThe GPT-3.5 model exhibited slightly lower performance compared to physicians across all metrics, though the differences were not statistically significant (McNemar test, P=.79). GPT-4 demonstrated clear superiority in several key metrics (McNemar test, P<.001). Notably, it achieved a sensitivity of 96.8%, compared to 88.2% for GPT-3.5 and 88.8% for physicians. However, physicians marginally outperformed GPT-4 in precision (97.7% vs 96.8%). GPT-4 showed greater consistency, replicating the exact same results in 76% of the reports across 10 repeated analyses, compared to 59% for GPT-3.5, indicating more stable and reliable performance. Physicians were more likely to miss explicit comorbidities, while the GPT models more frequently inferred nonexplicit comorbidities, sometimes correctly, though this also resulted in more false positives.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that, with well-designed prompts, the large language models examined can match or even surpass medical specialists in extracting information from complex clinical reports. Their superior efficiency in time and costs, along with easy integration with databases, makes them a valuable tool for large-scale data mining and real-world evidence generation.

Indexed as

Data MiningElectronic Health RecordsComorbidityHumansNatural Language ProcessingChatGPTdata miningEHRelectronic health recordlarge language modelsLLMsoncologyradiotherapy

Identifiers

PMID39746191
PMCPMC11739723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.