Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41041625›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2025

Leveraging open-source large language models for clinical information extraction in resource-constrained settings.

Luc Builtjes, Joeran Bosma, Mathias Prokop, Bram van Ginneken, Alessa Hering

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors.

Luc BuiltjesDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6272-2257
Joeran BosmaDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6315-124X
Mathias ProkopDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8157-8055
Bram van GinnekenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2028-8972
Alessa HeringDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, 6525GA Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7602-803X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the zero-shot performance of open-source generative large language models (LLMs) on clinical information extraction from Dutch medical reports using the Diagnostic Report Analysis: General Optimization of NLP (DRAGON) benchmark. Methods: We developed and released the llm_extractinator framework, a scalable, open-source tool for automating information extraction from clinical texts using LLMs. We evaluated 9 multilingual open-source LLMs across 28 tasks in the DRAGON benchmark, covering classification, regression, and named entity recognition (NER). All tasks were performed in a zero-shot setting. Model performance was quantified using task-specific metrics and aggregated into a DRAGON utility score. Additionally, we investigated the effect of in-context translation to English. Results: Llama-3.3-70B achieved the highest utility score (0.760), followed by Phi-4-14B (0.751), Qwen-2.5-14B (0.748), and DeepSeek-R1-14B (0.744). These models outperformed or matched a fine-tuned RoBERTa baseline on 17 of 28 tasks, particularly in regression and structured classification. NER performance was consistently low across all models. Translation to English consistently reduced performance. Discussion: Generative LLMs demonstrated strong zero-shot capabilities on clinical natural language processing tasks involving structured inference. Models around 14B parameters performed well overall, with Llama-3.3-70B leading but at high computational cost. Generative models excelled in regression tasks, but were hindered by token-level output formats for NER. Translation to English reduced performance, emphasizing the need for native language support. Conclusion: Open-source generative LLMs provide a viable zero-shot alternative for clinical information extraction from Dutch medical texts, particularly in low-resource and multilingual settings.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceinformation storage and retrievallarge language modelsnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID41041625
PMCPMC12488231

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.