ArticleScientific reports2026
Bridging the performance gap: systematic optimization of local LLMs for Japanese medical PHI extraction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cloud-based Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at medical text processing, but privacy regulations impose significant constraints on transmitting Protected Health Information (PHI) to external services, creating barriers to AI adoption for many healthcare institutions. While contractual agreements (e.g., Business Associate Agreements under HIPAA) may permit such transmission under specific conditions, many institutions prefer or require complete data sovereignty. Local LLMs address this need but have historically underperformed. This study introduces a five-phase optimization framework to bridge this performance gap. Using 160 synthetic Japanese radiology reports, we benchmarked 14 local LLMs against cloud leaders. Our key finding is a notable performance pattern: models with baseline scores below 87-88 points gained an average of + 6.92 points (p < 0.001), while higher-scoring models did not, suggesting a potential threshold effect for targeted optimization that warrants further investigation. The optimized Mistral-Small-3.2 with Self-Refine achieved 91.54 points-97.8% of GPT-4.1's performance-with perfect rule adherence and a clinically acceptable processing time of 24.6 s per report for batch workflows. Our work demonstrates that systematically optimized local LLMs can approach cloud-leader performance. Importantly, it provides a strategic framework guiding institutions on when and where to apply advanced optimization, enabling efficient and trustworthy AI deployment while ensuring patient privacy.
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.