ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Assessment of the Modified Rankin Scale in Electronic Health Records with a Fine-tuned Large Language Model.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Updated by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The modified Rankin scale (mRS) is an important metric in stroke research, often used as a primary outcome in clinical trials and observational studies. The mRS can be assessed retrospectively from electronic health records (EHR), though this process is labor-intensive and prone to inter-rater variability. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in automating clinical text classification. We hypothesize that a fine-tuned LLM can analyze EHR text and classify mRS scores for clinical and research applications. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to a specialist stroke neurology service at a large academic hospital system between August 2020 and June 2023. Each patient's medical record was reviewed at two time points: (1) hospital discharge and (2) approximately 90 days post-discharge. Two independent researchers assigned an mRS score at each time point. Two separate models were trained on EHR passages with corresponding mRS scores as labeled outcomes: (1) a multiclass model to classify all seven mRS scores and (2) a binary model to classify functional independence (mRS 0-2) versus non-independence (mRS 3-6). Four-fold cross-validation was conducted, using accuracy and Cohen's kappa as model performance metrics. Results: A total of 2,290 EHR passages with corresponding mRS scores were included in model training. The multiclass model-considering all seven scores of the mRS-attained an accuracy of 77% and a weighted Cohen's Kappa of 0.92. Class-specific accuracy was highest for mRS 4 (90%) and lowest for mRS 2 (28%). The binary model-considering only functional independence vs non-independence -attained an accuracy of 92% and Cohen's Kappa of 0.84. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that LLMs can be successfully trained to determine mRS scores through EHR text analysis. With further advancements, fully automated LLMs could scale across large clinical datasets, enabling data-driven public health strategies and optimized resource allocation.
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.