ArticleResearch synthesis methods2025
Generalizable and scalable multistage biomedical concept normalization leveraging large language models.
Article in Research synthesis methods, 2025. 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.
- CUI-Curate: a GraphRAG-based framework for automated clinical concept curation for NLP applications.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Application of large language models to the annotation of cell lines and mouse strains in genomics data.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026Article
- Improving biomedical entity linking with generative relevance feedback.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- A review for navigating the trade-offs: evaluating open-source and proprietary large language models for clinical and biomedical information extraction.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBiomedical entity normalization is critical to biomedical research because the richness of free-text clinical data, such as progress notes, can often be fully leveraged only after translating words and phrases into structured and coded representations suitable for analysis. Large Language Models (LLMs), in turn, have shown great potential and high performance in a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks, but their application for normalization remains understudied.
methodsWe applied both proprietary and open-source LLMs in combination with several rule-based normalization systems commonly used in biomedical research. We used a two-step LLM integration approach, (1) using an LLM to generate alternative phrasings of a source utterance, and (2) to prune candidate UMLS concepts, using a variety of prompting methods. We measure results by $F_{\beta }$, where we favor recall over precision, and F1.
resultsWe evaluated a total of 5,523 concept terms and text contexts from a publicly available dataset of human-annotated biomedical abstracts. Incorporating GPT-3.5-turbo increased overall $F_{\beta }$ and F1 in normalization systems +16.5 and +16.2 (OpenAI embeddings), +9.5 and +7.3 (MetaMapLite), +13.9 and +10.9 (QuickUMLS), and +10.5 and +10.3 (BM25), while the open-source Vicuna model achieved +20.2 and +21.7 (OpenAI embeddings), +10.8 and +12.2 (MetaMapLite), +14.7 and +15 (QuickUMLS), and +15.6 and +18.7 (BM25).
conclusionsExisting general-purpose LLMs, both propriety and open-source, can be leveraged to greatly improve normalization performance using existing tools, with no fine-tuning.
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.