ArticleScientific reports2025
Human level information extraction from clinical reports with finetuned language models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Practical Guide to Large Language Models for Information Extraction in Behavioral Health Notes: Tutorial.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Fine-Tuning Large Language Models for Structured Extraction of Infectious Disease-Related Information From Clinical Notes in Japanese Primary Care: Development and Internal Validation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Automatic extraction of structured information from brain MRI reports using an open-weight large language model.European radiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Large Language Models for Structured Data Extraction From Interstitial Lung Disease Clinical Notes: Comparative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Memorization in large language models in medicine prevalence characteristics and implications.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Performance of large language models for extracting clinical data from breast cancer pathology reports: a systematic review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- End-to-End Pipeline Integrating Local Small Language Models and Machine Learning for Data Extraction and Stroke Outcome Prediction in Emergency Department.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- From Zero-Shot to Bedside: A Practical Playbook for Adapting Open-Source Large Language Models to Clinical Symptom Extraction.Proceedings of machine learning research · 2026Article
- Can open source large language models be used for tumor documentation in Germany?-An evaluation on urological doctors' notes.BioData mining · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracting structured data from clinical notes remains a key bottleneck in clinical research. We hypothesized that with minimal computational and annotation resources, open-source large language models (LLMs) could create high-quality research databases. We developed Strata, a low-code library for leveraging LLMs for data extraction from clinical reports. Trained researchers labeled four datasets from prostate MRI, breast pathology, kidney pathology, and bone marrow (MDS) pathology reports. Using Strata, we evaluated open-source LLMs, including instruction-tuned, medicine-specific, reasoning-based, and LoRA-finetuned LLMs. We compared these models to zero-shot GPT-4 and a second human annotator. Our primary evaluation metric was exact match accuracy, which assesses if all variables for a report were extracted correctly. LoRa-finetuned Llama-3.1 8B achieved non-inferior performance to the second human annotator across all four datasets, with an average exact match accuracy of 90.0 ± 1.7. Fine-tuned Llama-3.1 outperformed all other open-source models, including DeepSeekR1-Distill-Llama and Llama-3-8B-UltraMedical, which obtained average exact match accuracies of 56.8 ± 29.0 and 39.1 ± 24.4 respectively. GPT-4 was non-inferior to the second human annotator in all datasets except kidney pathology. Small, open-source LLMs offer an accessible solution for the curation of local research databases; they obtain human-level accuracy while only leveraging desktop-grade hardware and ≤ 100 training reports. Unlike commercial LLMs, these tools can be locally hosted and version-controlled. Strata enables automated human-level performance in extracting structured data from clinical notes using ≤ 100 training reports and a single desktop-grade GPU.
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.