Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41838967›Full record

ArticleJCO clinical cancer informatics2026

Ensuring Reliability of Curated Electronic Health Record-Derived Data: The Validation of Accuracy for Large Language Model-/Machine Learning-Extracted Information and Data (VALID) Framework.

Melissa Estevez, Nisha Singh, Lauren Dyson, Blythe Adamson, Konstantin Krismer, Kelly Magee, Qianyu Yuan, Megan W Hildner, Erin Fidyk, Tori Williams and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JCO clinical cancer informatics, 2026. 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. Observational
  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

14 authors.

Melissa EstevezFlatiron Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0001-7800-0156
Nisha SinghFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Lauren DysonFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Blythe AdamsonFlatiron Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0003-4251-2912
Konstantin KrismerFlatiron Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0001-8994-3416
Kelly MageeFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Qianyu YuanFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Megan W HildnerFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Erin FidykFlatiron Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0002-5592-1507
Tori WilliamsFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Olive MbahFlatiron Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0001-5398-7214
Farhad KhanFlatiron Health, New York, NY.
Kathi Seidl-RathkopfFlatiron Health GmbH, Berlin, Germany.
Aaron B CohenFlatiron Health, New York, NY.ORCID 0000-0002-5598-9210

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to extract clinical data from electronic health records, offering significant improvements in scalability and efficiency for real-world data (RWD) curation in oncology. However, the adoption of LLMs introduces new challenges in ensuring the reliability, accuracy, and fairness of extracted data, which are essential for research, regulatory, and clinical applications. Existing quality assurance frameworks for RWD and artificial intelligence (AI) do not fully address the unique error modes and complexities associated with LLM-extracted data. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive framework for evaluating the quality of clinical data extracted by LLMs. The framework integrates variable-level performance benchmarking against expert human abstraction, verification checks for internal consistency and plausibility, and replication analyses comparing LLM-extracted data to human-abstracted data sets or external standards. This multidimensional approach enables the identification of variables most in need of improvement, systematic detection of latent errors, and confirmation of data set fitness-for-purpose in real-world research. Additionally, the framework supports bias assessment by stratifying across demographic subgroups. By providing a rigorous and transparent method for assessing LLM-extracted RWD, this framework advances industry standards and supports the trustworthy use of AI-powered evidence generation in oncology research and practice.

Indexed as

Data CurationElectronic Health RecordsMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceHumansLarge Language ModelsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID41838967
PMCPMC13001894

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-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.