Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40966762›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2025

Comparison of rule- and large language model-based phenotype extraction from clinical notes for neurofibromatosis type 1.

Levi Kaster, Ethan Hillis, Inez Y Oh, Elizabeth C Cordell, Randi E Foraker, Albert M Lai, Stephanie M Morris, David H Gutmann, Philip R O Payne, Aditi Gupta

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Levi KasterInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-3773-801X
Ethan HillisInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Inez Y OhInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0780-8710
Elizabeth C CordellDepartment of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Randi E ForakerInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Albert M LaiInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9241-2656
Stephanie M MorrisCenter for Autism Services, Science, and Innovation (CASSI), Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD 21211, United States.
David H GutmannDepartment of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.
Philip R O PayneInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9532-2998
Aditi GuptaInstitute for Informatics, Data Science and Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, United States.

Funding

Personalized risk assessment in Neurofibromatosis Type 1R01NS131112 · NINDS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Aditi Gupta, PHILIP R.O. PAYNE · 2023 to 2026
$2.2M
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke of the National Institutes of Health R01NS131112NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS131112
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNeurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a rare genetic disorder affecting multiple organ systems with significant clinical heterogeneity. Managing individuals with NF1 is challenging due to variability in disease progression and outcomes and limited early risk assessment tools.

objectiveThis study aims to develop an effective, generalizable, user-friendly clinical entity extraction pipeline for identifying NF1-related phenotypes from unstructured clinical notes to enhance research and risk-modeling efforts. We compare the benefits of rule-based natural language processing (NLP) vs large language models (LLMs) for this purpose. MATERIALS AND

methodsFour phenotype extraction pipelines (3 LLM-based vs 1 rule-based) were developed to automatically extract selected NF1-relevant phenotypes. Subject matter experts manually reviewed clinical notes, generating a gold-standard annotation dataset for evaluation. In Phase 1, notes authored by a single NF1 physician were used to guide pipeline development and refinement. In Phase 2, notes from a second NF1 physician were used to assess pipeline generalizability, followed by further refinement to accommodate differences in physician terminology.

resultsWith refinement, the rule-based model had higher distributions of F1 scores than the LLMs in both Phase 1 and Phase 2. However, the LLMs demonstrated better generalizability between physicians without refinement, showing lesser performance decreases (4.4%-5.1%) when transitioning from Phase 1 to Phase 2 without refinement, compared to an 8.8% decrease for the rule-based model.

conclusionWe highlight trade-offs between the effectiveness of rule-based NLP vs generalizability and ease of implementation of LLMs for clinical entity extraction, with implications for pipeline portability across providers and institutions.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsNatural Language ProcessingNeurofibromatosis 1PhenotypeHumansLarge Language Modelsinformation extractionlarge language modelsnatural language processingneurofibromatosis type 1phenotyping

Identifiers

PMID40966762
PMCPMC12626218

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.