ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2024
Natural Language Processing for Digital Health in the Era of Large Language Models.
Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 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.
- Clinical Laboratory Terminology Standardization for Semantic Interoperability Using a Large Language Model-Based Agent: Methodological Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Harnessing AI and social media to understand real-world patient experiences in SLE.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Plying potency assays for immunotherapy of solid tumors.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Domain and Language adaptive pre-training of BERT models for Korean-English bilingual clinical text analysis.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Digital Health for Precision Prevention.Yearbook of medical informatics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLarge language models (LLMs) are revolutionizing the natural language pro-cessing (NLP) landscape within healthcare, prompting the need to synthesize the latest ad-vancements and their diverse medical applications. We attempt to summarize the current state of research in this rapidly evolving space.
methodsWe conducted a review of the most recent studies on biomedical NLP facilitated by LLMs, sourcing literature from PubMed, the Association for Computational Linguistics Anthology, IEEE Explore, and Google Scholar (the latter particularly for preprints). Given the ongoing exponential growth in LLM-related publications, our survey was inherently selective. We attempted to abstract key findings in terms of (i) LLMs customized for medical texts, and (ii) the type of medical text being leveraged by LLMs, namely medical literature, electronic health records (EHRs), and social media. In addition to technical details, we touch upon topics such as privacy, bias, interpretability, and equitability.
resultsWe observed that while general-purpose LLMs (e.g., GPT-4) are most popular, there is a growing trend in training or customizing open-source LLMs for specific biomedi-cal texts and tasks. Several promising open-source LLMs are currently available, and appli-cations involving EHRs and biomedical literature are more prominent relative to noisier data sources such as social media. For supervised classification and named entity recogni-tion tasks, traditional (encoder only) transformer-based models still outperform new-age LLMs, and the latter are typically suited for few-shot settings and generative tasks such as summarization. There is still a paucity of research on evaluation, bias, privacy, reproduci-bility, and equitability of LLMs.
conclusionsLLMs have the potential to transform NLP tasks within the broader medical domain. While technical progress continues, biomedical application focused research must prioritize aspects not necessarily related to performance such as task-oriented evaluation, bias, and equitable use.
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.