Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41742185›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026

Evaluating large language models for clinical note processing: local fine-tuning and internal-external validation using electronic health records from South Asia.

Seyed Alireza Hasheminasab, Faisal Jamil, Muhammad Usman Afzal, Ali Haider Khan, Sehrish Ilyas, Ali Noor, Awais Touseef, Salma Abbas, Hajira Nisar Cheema, Muhammad Usman Shabbir and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

19 authors.

Seyed Alireza HasheminasabCentre for Statistics in Medicine (CSM), Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Faisal JamilShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Muhammad Usman AfzalShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Ali Haider KhanShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Sehrish IlyasShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Ali NoorShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Awais TouseefShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Salma AbbasShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Hajira Nisar CheemaShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Muhammad Usman ShabbirShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Iqra HameedShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Maleeha AyubShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Hamayal MasoodShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Amina JafarShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Amir Mukhtar KhanShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Muhammad Abid NazirShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Muhammad Asaad JamilShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Faisal SultanShaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.
Sara KhalidCentre for Statistics in Medicine (CSM), Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. sara.khalid@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2845-5731

Funding

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation INV-062576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveLarge Language Models (LLMs) hold the potential for clinical task-shifting by processing unstructured clinical text, enabling tasks such as clinical concept extraction and medical question answering from electronic health records. If implemented reliably, such approaches may benefit over-burdened healthcare systems, particularly in resource-limited settings and for traditionally overlooked populations, provided that local fine-tuning is supported by appropriate clinical and technical expertise. However, this powerful technology remains largely understudied in real-world contexts, particularly in the Global South. This study aims to assess whether openly available LLMs can be used reliably for processing medical notes in real-world settings in South Asia.

methodsWe used publicly available LLMs to parse de-identified clinical notes from a large electronic health records (EHR) database in Pakistan, containing hospital records for 8.2 million patients. ChatGPT (GPT-3.5) as a general-purpose LLM, and GatorTron (base), BioMegatron, BioBert and ClinicalBERT as medical LLMs were evaluated when applied to these data, after fine-tuning them with (a) publicly available clinical datasets namely Informatics for Integrating Biology & the Bedside (I2B2) and National NLP Clinical Challenges (N2C2) for medical concept extraction (MCE) and emrQA for medical question answering (MQA), and (b) the local Pakistani de-identified EHR dataset, which includes inpatient Discharge Summaries (DS) and Subjective, Objective, Assessment, and Plan (SOAP) notes, as detailed in this paper. MCE models were applied to these clinical notes using both 3-label and 9-label formats, while MQA models were applied to medical questions. Internal and external validation performance was measured for (a) and (b) using F1 score, precision, recall, and accuracy for MCE and BLEU and ROUGE-L, which measure lexical and sequence similarity, for MQA.

resultsWhen clinical LLMs were not fine-tuned on the local EHR dataset, their performance during external validation on local data was notably poorer compared to internal validation on the dataset used for fine-tuning, with reductions of at least 15% in F1 scores for MCE and 35% in ROUGE-L and BLEU scores for MQA tasks. This suggests potential bias and highlights the inability of the medical LLMs to reliably handle the data distribution of the local population without further fine-tuning and adaptation. This trend persisted across two distinct natural language processing tasks: concept extraction and question answering, spanning a spectrum of task complexities. However, fine-tuning the LLMs with local EHR data significantly improved model performance across both tasks, yielding a 7.5% to 15% increase in the F1 score for MCE and a 27% to 53% increase in ROUGE-L and BLEU scores for MQA. Notably, ChatGPT, as a general-purpose LLM, stood out as an exception, demonstrating superior performance across all measured metrics on the local dataset compared to the publicly available dataset, with improvements ranging from 3% to 17% on the local EHR dataset, even without fine-tuning on the local data.

conclusionsPublicly available LLMs, predominantly trained on data from high-income regions, were found to be unreliable when applied in a real-world clinical setting in Pakistan. Fine-tuning them with local EHR data and regional clinical contexts improved their reliability, demonstrating a feasible adaptation strategy that is substantially less resource-intensive than training large language models from scratch. Close collaboration between local clinical and technical experts to curate and leverage more representative, inclusive, and unbiased medical datasets, can play a crucial role in further ensuring reliability of LLMs for resource-limited, overburdened settings, to be used in ways that are safe, fair, and beneficial for all.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsLarge Language ModelsHumansPakistanClinical note processingElectronic health recordsExternal validationFine-tuningGlobal healthHealth equityLarge language modelsMedical concept extractionMedical question answering

Identifiers

PMID41742185
PMCPMC12988631

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.