ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
For clinical data extraction, QLoRA attains accuracy close to LoRA while requiring lower compute resources.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Large language models (LLMs) can accurately extract structured data from free text, yet fine-tuning for specific clinical tasks is often compute- and memory-intensive. We examine whether Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT)-updating only a small subset of weights in the LLM-preserves accuracy on quantized models while further reducing memory and graphical processing unit (GPU) requirements for hardware-limited teams. Methods: We fine-tuned three Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct variants: (i) a non-quantized low-rank adaptation (LoRA) model and (ii-iii) quantized low-rank adaptation (QLoRA) models initialized from 8-bit and 4-bit quantized bases. We used the ELMTEX corpus of 60,000 clinical summaries extracted from PubMed Central, which included manual annotations for 15 categories. Models were evaluated with naïve and advanced prompting to extract data from the corpus for the 15 categories. Advanced prompting involved a detailed task description and three examples selected using similarity scores. Metrics included ROUGE and BERTScore for lexical/semantic alignment, and entity-level precision, recall, and F1 to assess clinical concept extraction. Results: Fine-tuning consistently outperformed prompting alone. LoRA improved metrics by 10-20 points over the base model, while QLoRA improved by 8-14 points-only 2-4 points below LoRA. Quantization lowered the need for resources- LoRA required 4 GPUs, versus 3 (8-bit) and 2 (4-bit) for QLoRA. Compared with LoRA, 4-bit QLoRA used about two-thirds of the peak GPU RAM. However training of quantized models took 28-32% longer, likely due to dequantization overhead and less-mature library routines. Conclusion: PEFT on quantized models preserves most of LoRA's accuracy gains while substantially reducing GPU count and memory footprint, providing a practical path for accurate clinical information extraction in resource-constrained settings. This study was limited to a single architecture (Llama-3.1-8B) and use of clinical summaries that are less complex than routine clinical notes, which constrains generalizability of the results. Future work should test QLoRA across diverse architectures and sizes and on clinical corpora representative of real-world practice.
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.