ArticleNPJ digital medicine2025
Understanding contraceptive switching rationales from real world clinical notes using large language models.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptive Fast-Slow Large Language Model Framework for Multidimensional Classification of Prenatal Ultrasound Reports: Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- An integrated and interpretable machine learning framework for Kawasaki disease diagnosis and risk prediction.Translational pediatrics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding reasons for treatment switching is of significant medical interest, but these factors are often only found in unstructured clinical notes and can be difficult to extract. We evaluated the zero-shot abilities of GPT-4 and eight other open-source large language models (LLMs) to extract contraceptive switching information from 1964 clinical notes derived from the UCSF Information Commons dataset. GPT-4 extracted the contraceptives started and stopped at each switch with microF1 scores of 0.85 and 0.88, respectively, compared to 0.81 and 0.88 for the best open-source model. When evaluated by clinical experts, GPT-4 extracted reasons for switching with an accuracy of 91.4% (2.2% hallucination rate). Transformer-based topic modeling identified patient preference, adverse events, and insurance coverage as key reasons. These findings demonstrate the value of LLMs in identifying complex treatment factors and provide insights into reasons for contraceptive switching in real-world settings.
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.