ArticleArXiv2025
Multi-Label Classification with Generative AI Models in Healthcare: A Case Study of Suicidality and Risk Factors.
Article in ArXiv, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Suicide remains a pressing global health crisis, with over 720,000 deaths annually and millions more affected by suicide ideation (SI) and suicide attempts (SA). Early identification of suicidality-related factors (SrFs), including SI, SA, exposure to suicide (ES), and non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), is critical for timely intervention. While prior studies have applied AI to detect SrFs in clinical notes, most treat suicidality as a binary classification task, overlooking the complexity of co-occurring risk factors. This study explores the use of generative large language models (LLMs), specifically GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.5, for multi-label classification (MLC) of SrFs from psychiatric electronic health records (EHRs). We present a novel end-to-end generative MLC pipeline and introduce advanced evaluation methods, including label-set-level metrics and a multi-label confusion matrix for error analysis. Fine-tuned GPT-3.5 achieved top performance with 0.94 partial-match accuracy and 0.91 F1 score, while GPT-4.5 with guided prompting showed superior performance across label sets, including rare or minority label sets, indicating a more balanced and robust performance. Our findings reveal systematic error patterns, such as the conflation of SI and SA, and highlight the models' tendency toward cautious over-labeling. This work not only demonstrates the feasibility of using generative AI for complex clinical classification tasks but also provides a blueprint for structuring unstructured EHR data to support large-scale clinical research and evidence-based medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40740509PMC12310136What 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.