ArticleRMD open2024
Large language models for accurate disease detection in electronic health records: the examples of crystal arthropathies.
Article in RMD open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of Zero-Shot Classifiers for Categorizing RCT Abstracts by Intervention Type: Validation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Operationalizing Large Language Models for Clinical Research Data Extraction: Methods, Quality Control, and Governance.Journal of medical systems · 2026Review
- From diagnostics to education: Multi-domain evaluation of LLM chatbots in neurology.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Review
- Development of a confidence-based Natural Language Processing tool to identify inflammatory arthritis from non-inflammatory conditions in Rheumatology medical notes.Arthritis research & therapy · 2026Article
- Status, challenges, and prospects of artificial intelligence application in gout diagnosis and treatment, drug research and development, and disease monitoring.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- From chat to act: large language model agents and agentic AI as the next frontier of AI in rheumatology.EULAR rheumatology open · 2025Review
- Large Language Models in Medical Diagnostics: Scoping Review With Bibliometric Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Coronary artery calcium and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk scores in patients with calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Large language models in clinical nutrition: an overview of its applications, capabilities, limitations, and potential future prospects.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe propose and test a framework to detect disease diagnosis using a recent large language model (LLM), Meta's Llama-3-8B, on French-language electronic health record (EHR) documents. Specifically, it focuses on detecting gout ('goutte' in French), a ubiquitous French term that has multiple meanings beyond the disease. The study compares the performance of the LLM-based framework with traditional natural language processing techniques and tests its dependence on the parameter used.
methodsThe framework was developed using a training and testing set of 700 paragraphs assessing 'gout' from a random selection of EHR documents from a tertiary university hospital in Geneva, Switzerland. All paragraphs were manually reviewed and classified by two healthcare professionals into disease (true gout) and non-disease (gold standard). The LLM's accuracy was tested using few-shot and chain-of-thought prompting and compared with a regular expression (regex)-based method, focusing on the effects of model parameters and prompt structure. The framework was further validated on 600 paragraphs assessing 'Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease (CPPD)'.
resultsThe LLM-based algorithm outperformed the regex method, achieving a 92.7% (88.7%-95.4%) positive predictive value, a 96.6% (94.6%-97.8%) negative predictive value and an accuracy of 95.4% (93.6%-96.7%) for gout. In the validation set on CPPD, accuracy was 94.1% (90.2%-97.6%). The LLM framework performed well over a wide range of parameter values.
conclusionLLMs accurately detected disease diagnoses from EHRs, even in non-English languages. They could facilitate creating large disease registers in any language, improving disease care assessment and patient recruitment for clinical trials.
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.