ArticleScientific reports2025
A comprehensive qualitative analysis of patient dialogue summarization using large language models applied to noisy, informal, non-English real-world data.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to summarize real-world dialogues between patients and the healthcare team of an e-health company that provides digital healthcare services, primarily communicating via WhatsApp. The team needs quick access to patient information to deliver accurate and personalized responses. Summarizing past messages is the approach examined here, aiming for concise, non-redundant, and truthful summaries that capture the main dialogue characteristics despite facing (real-world) noisy and informal content in an under-represented language - Portuguese. To do so, we collected an anonymized Portuguese dataset of WhatsApp messages exchanged between patients and the healthcare team. Dialogue quality was assessed for size, readability, and correctness before generating summaries with LLaMA3 and Qwen2 using specific prompts. Volunteers evaluated these summaries on coverage, relevance, redundancy, and veracity using a 5-point Likert scale. Our qualitative and quantitative experimental results indicate that LLMs can produce effective summaries of dialogues between patients and healthcare teams, even when faced with low-quality data in an underrepresented language. This is a surprising result due to the challenging scenario. Among the tested LLMs, LLaMA3 demonstrated a slight edge over QWen2 in coverage and veracity among the evaluated methods. Our results demonstrate a potential to build real-world practical services to assist healthcare professionals in responding to patient messages with agility, clarity, and cohesion, enhancing both communication efficiency and patient satisfaction. Ultimately, the advocated approach could significantly improve the landscape of online healthcare communication, particularly in resource-constrained settings like Brazil, where access to primary care is limited.
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.