Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41031072›Full record

ArticleArXiv2024

MedCalc-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models for Medical Calculations.

Nikhil Khandekar, Qiao Jin, Guangzhi Xiong, Soren Dunn, Serina S Applebaum, Zain Anwar, Maame Sarfo-Gyamfi, Conrad W Safranek, Abid A Anwar, Andrew Zhang and 7 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

17 authors.

Nikhil KhandekarNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Qiao JinNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.
Guangzhi XiongUniversity of Virginia.
Soren DunnUniversity of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.
Serina S ApplebaumYale University School of Medicine.
Zain AnwarRosalind Franklin University Chicago Medical School.
Maame Sarfo-GyamfiHoward University College of Medicine.
Conrad W SafranekYale University School of Medicine.
Abid A AnwarUniversity of Illinois College of Medicine at Chicago.
Andrew ZhangUniversity of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine.
Aidan GilsonYale University School of Medicine.
Maxwell B SingerYale University School of Medicine.
Amisha DaveYale University School of Medicine.
Andrew TaylorYale University School of Medicine.
Aidong ZhangUniversity of Virginia.
Qingyu ChenYale University School of Medicine.
Zhiyong LuNational Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As opposed to evaluating computation and logic-based reasoning, current benchmarks for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in medicine are primarily focused on question-answering involving domain knowledge and descriptive reasoning. While such qualitative capabilities are vital to medical diagnosis, in real-world scenarios, doctors frequently use clinical calculators that follow quantitative equations and rule-based reasoning paradigms for evidence-based decision support. To this end, we propose MedCalc-Bench, a first-of-its-kind dataset focused on evaluating the medical calculation capability of LLMs. MedCalc-Bench contains an evaluation set of over 1000 manually reviewed instances from 55 different medical calculation tasks. Each instance in MedCalc-Bench consists of a patient note, a question requesting to compute a specific medical value, a ground truth answer, and a step-by-step explanation showing how the answer is obtained. While our evaluation results show the potential of LLMs in this area, none of them are effective enough for clinical settings. Common issues include extracting the incorrect entities, not using the correct equation or rules for a calculation task, or incorrectly performing the arithmetic for the computation. We hope our study highlights the quantitative knowledge and reasoning gaps in LLMs within medical settings, encouraging future improvements of LLMs for various clinical calculation tasks.

Identifiers

PMID41031072
PMCPMC12478433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
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.