ArticleProceedings. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics2024
Assertion Detection in Clinical Natural Language Processing using Large Language Models.
Article in Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- irAE-GPT: leveraging large language models to identify immune-related adverse events in electronic health records and clinical trial datasets.EBioMedicine · 2026Article
- Multimodal models for skin cancer classification using clinical freetext and dermatoscopic images.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Navigating the complexity of WHO CNS5: the evolutionary trajectory of glioma classification and the emergence of large language models.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Span-based annotation framework for LLM-based clinical named entity recognition: development and validation using Korean emergency department notes.JAMIA open · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, we aim to address the task of assertion detection when extracting medical concepts from clinical notes, a key process in clinical natural language processing (NLP). Assertion detection in clinical NLP usually involves identifying assertion types for medical concepts in the clinical text, namely certainty (whether the medical concept is positive, negated, possible, or hypothetical), temporality (whether the medical concept is for present or the past history), and experiencer (whether the medical concept is described for the patient or a family member). These assertion types are essential for healthcare professionals to quickly and clearly understand the context of medical conditions from unstructured clinical texts, directly influencing the quality and outcomes of patient care. Although widely used, traditional methods, particularly rule-based NLP systems and machine learning or deep learning models, demand intensive manual efforts to create patterns and tend to overlook less common assertion types, leading to an incomplete understanding of the context. To address this challenge, our research introduces a novel methodology that utilizes Large Language Models (LLMs) pre-trained on a vast array of medical data for assertion detection. We enhanced the current method with advanced reasoning techniques, including Tree of Thought (ToT), Chain of Thought (CoT), and Self-Consistency (SC), and refine it further with Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) fine-tuning. We first evaluated the model on the i2b2 2010 assertion dataset. Our method achieved a micro-averaged F-1 of 0.89, with 0.11 improvements over the previous works. To further assess the generalizability of our approach, we extended our evaluation to a local dataset that focused on sleep concept extraction. Our approach achieved an F-1 of 0.74, which is 0.31 higher than the previous method. The results show that using LLMs is a viable option for assertion detection in clinical NLP and can potentially integrate with other LLM-based concept extraction models for clinical NLP tasks.
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.