ArticleJournal of clinical epidemiology2026
Scalable medication extraction and discontinuation identification from electronic health records using large language models.
Article in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automated Identification of Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention from Cardiac Catheterization Reports using Large Language Models.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- The Performance of Large Language Models in Extracting Intestinal Symptoms From Electronic Health Records: Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Multisite Real-World Validation of an Electronic Health Record-Integrated Generative Artificial Intelligence Tool for Venous Thromboembolism Risk Stratification.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Extracting and Classifying Drug Discontinuations From Estonian Electronic Health Records: Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesIdentifying medication discontinuations in electronic health records (EHRs) is vital for patient safety but is often hindered by information being buried in unstructured notes. This study aims to evaluate the capabilities of advanced open-sourced and proprietary large language models in extracting medications and classifying their medication status from EHR notes, focusing on their scalability for medication information extraction without human annotation. STUDY DESIGN AND
settingWe collected three EHR datasets from diverse sources to build the evaluation benchmark: 1 publicly available dataset (Reannotated Clinical Acronym Sense Inventory dataset [Re-CASI]), 1 we annotated based on public MIMIC notes (MIMIC-IV Medication Snippet dataset [MIV-Med]), and 1 internally annotated on clinical notes from Mass General Brigham (MGB-Med). We evaluated 12 advanced LLMs, including general-domain open-sourced models (eg, Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct, Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct), medical-specific models (eg, MeLLaMA-70B-chat), and a proprietary model (GPT-4o). We explored multiple LLM prompting strategies, including zero-shot, 5-shot, and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) approaches. Performance on medication extraction, medication status classification, and their joint task (extraction then classification) was systematically compared across all experiments.
resultsLLMs showed promising performance on medication extraction, while discontinuation classification and joint tasks were more challenging. GPT-4o consistently achieved the highest average F1 scores in all tasks under zero-shot setting - 94.0% for medication extraction, 78.1% for discontinuation classification, and 72.7% for the joint task. Open-sourced models followed closely, with Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct achieving the highest performance in medication status classification on the MIV-Med dataset (68.7%) and in the joint task on both the Re-CASI (76.2%) and MIV-Med (60.2%) datasets. Medical-specific LLMs demonstrated lower performance compared to advanced general-domain LLMs. Few-shot learning generally improved performance, while CoT reasoning showed inconsistent gains. Notably, open-sourced models occasionally surpassed GPT-4o performance, underscoring their potential in privacy-sensitive clinical research.
conclusionLLMs demonstrate strong potential for medication extraction and discontinuation identification on EHR notes, with open-sourced models offering scalable alternatives to proprietary systems and few-shot learning further improving LLMs' capability. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Stopping a medicine can affect safety and treatment decisions, yet this detail is often buried in long electronic health record notes. We evaluated whether large language models, which read and summarize text, can automatically find medication names and decide whether each medicine is still being taken, has been stopped, or neither. We tested 12 models, including open-source options suitable for secure hospital use, on three collections of clinical notes and compared three simple instruction styles: giving no examples, showing a few examples, and asking for step-by-step reasoning. All models produced usable results. The strongest systems scored about 94 for finding medication names and about 78 for deciding continued or stopped status, on a standard 0 to 100 measure that balances completeness and correctness. Showing a few examples usually helped more than step-by-step prompts, and several open-source models performed close to a leading proprietary system. These tools could help hospitals and researchers monitor medications at scale to support drug-safety studies, adherence tracking, and clinical decision support, with local validation and safeguards before clinical use.
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.