Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41626935›Full record

ArticleResearch synthesis methods2025

Generalizable and scalable multistage biomedical concept normalization leveraging large language models.

Nicholas J Dobbins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. CUI-Curate: a GraphRAG-based framework for automated clinical concept curation for NLP applications.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

1 author.

Nicholas J DobbinsBiomedical Informatics and Data Science, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

U.S. National Library of Medicine
6 · The paper itself

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

Biomedical ResearchLarge Language ModelsNatural Language ProcessingAlgorithmsData MiningHumansUnified Medical Language Systembiomedical conceptsentity linkinglarge language modelnormalizationUMLS

Identifiers

PMID41626935
PMCPMC12527512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
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.