Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41383383›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025

Optimized BERT-based NLP outperforms zero-shot methods for automated symptom detection in clinical practice.

Juan G Diaz Ochoa, Natalie Layer, Jonas Mahr, Faizan E Mustafa, Christian U Menzel, Martina Müller, Tobias Schilling, Gerald Illerhaus, Markus Knott, Alexander Krohn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

10 authors.

Juan G Diaz OchoaQuiBiQ GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany.
Natalie LayerKlinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart Cancer Center - Tumorzentrum Eva Mayr-Stihl DE, Stuttgart, Germany.
Jonas MahrQuiBiQ GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany.
Faizan E MustafaQuiBiQ GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany.
Christian U MenzelDepartment for Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine (DIANI), Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Martina MüllerDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.
Tobias SchillingDepartment for Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine (DIANI), Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.
Gerald IllerhausKlinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart Cancer Center - Tumorzentrum Eva Mayr-Stihl DE, Stuttgart, Germany.
Markus KnottKlinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart Cancer Center - Tumorzentrum Eva Mayr-Stihl DE, Stuttgart, Germany.
Alexander KrohnDepartment for Emergency and Intensive Care Medicine (DIANI), Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Large Language Models (LLMs) have raised broad expectations for clinical use, particularly in the processing of complex medical narratives. However, in practice, more targeted Natural Language Processing (NLP) approaches may offer higher precision and feasibility for symptom extraction from real-world clinical texts. NLP provides promising tools for extracting clinical information from unstructured medical narratives. However, few studies have focused on integrating symptom information from free texts in German, particularly for complex patient groups such as emergency department (ED) patients. The ED setting presents specific challenges: high documentation pressure, heterogeneous language styles, and the need for secure, locally deployable models due to strict data protection regulations. Furthermore, German remains a low-resource language in clinical NLP. Methods: We implemented and compared two models for zero-shot learning-GLiNER and Mistral-and a fine-tuned BERT-based SCAI-BIO/BioGottBERT model for named entity recognition (NER) of symptoms, anatomical terms, and negations in German ED anamnesis texts in an on-premises environment in a hospital. Manual annotations of 150 narratives were used for model validation. The postprocessing steps included confidence-based filtering, negation exclusion, symptom standardization, and integration with structured oncology registry data. All computations were performed on local hospital servers in an on-premises implementation to ensure full data protection compliance. Results: The fine-tuned SCAI-BIO/BioGottBERT model outperformed both zero-shot approaches, achieving an F1 score of 0.84 for symptom extraction and demonstrating superior performance in negation detection. The validated pipeline enabled systematic extraction of affirmed symptoms from ED-free text, transforming them into structured data. This method allows large-scale analysis of symptom profiles across patient populations and serves as a technical foundation for symptom-based clustering and subgroup analysis. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates that modern NLP methods can reliably extract clinical symptoms from German ED free text, even under strict data protection constraints and with limited training resources. Fine-tuned models offer a precise and practical solution for integrating unstructured narratives into clinical decision-making. This work lays the methodological foundation for a new way of systematically analyzing large patient cohorts on the basis of free-text data. Beyond symptoms, this approach can be extended to extracting diagnoses, procedures, or other clinically relevant entities. Building upon this framework, we apply network-based clustering methods (in a subsequent study) to identify clinically meaningful patient subgroups and explore sex- and age-specific patterns in symptom expression.

Indexed as

clinical NLPfine-tuninglarge language models (LLM)named entity recognition (NER)natural language processing (NLP)symptom extraction

Identifiers

PMID41383383
PMCPMC12689901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.