Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42397952›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Linguistic Fidelity and Classification Performance of Large Language Models for Generating Synthetic Operative Notes: Evaluation Study.

Meredith Cox, Elaine Lin, Nicholas Oleck, Carlee Jones, Neill Y Li, Suhail K Mithani, Alexander C Allori

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 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

7 authors.

Meredith CoxDivision of Plastic, Oral, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Duke University Hospital, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, United States, 1 919-668-3110.ORCID 0000-0001-9642-653X
Elaine LinDivision of Plastic, Oral, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Duke University Hospital, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, United States, 1 919-668-3110.ORCID 0000-0001-9078-1186
Nicholas OleckDivision of Plastic, Oral, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Duke University Hospital, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, United States, 1 919-668-3110.ORCID 0000-0001-5415-5161
Carlee JonesDivision of Plastic, Oral, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Duke University Hospital, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, United States, 1 919-668-3110.ORCID 0009-0001-2336-8129
Neill Y LiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9149-4859
Suhail K MithaniDivision of Plastic, Oral, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Duke University Hospital, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, United States, 1 919-668-3110.ORCID 0000-0002-3762-0831
Alexander C AlloriDivision of Plastic, Oral, and Maxillofacial Surgery, Duke University Hospital, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, United States, 1 919-668-3110.ORCID 0000-0003-3334-9877

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Machine learning models for surgical applications require large, diverse datasets; however, data scarcity remains a critical limitation due to privacy regulations, institutional variability, and the rarity of many surgical procedures. Large language models (LLMs) offer a potential solution through synthetic data generation, but their performance and reliability in specialized surgical domains remain underexplored. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the linguistic fidelity of LLM-generated operative notes for cleft lip and palate procedures and to assess their impact on natural language processing classifier performance under varying data availability conditions. Methods: A total of 630 authentic operative notes were obtained from cleft procedures (86 primary cleft lip repairs, 101 primary cleft palate repairs, and 62 primary alveolar bone grafting [ABG] procedures) performed between 2013 and 2024. GPT-4o generated matched synthetic notes using multishot prompting with anonymized examples. Linguistic fidelity was evaluated using BERTScore for semantic similarity, Jensen-Shannon divergence of part-of-speech trigrams for syntactic structure, and Bilingual Evaluation Understudy (BLEU) scores for lexical overlap. Binary classifiers using ClinicalBERT embeddings and logistic regression were trained under both full data and data-scarce (retaining 5% or 10% of positive training cases while retaining the full negative training set) conditions, with and without synthetic augmentation at approximate ratios of synthetic to real notes (1:1, 2:1, 5:1, and 10:1). Results: Synthetic notes demonstrated high semantic fidelity across all procedures (BERTScore F1-score: 0.86-0.88) and low syntactic divergence (Jensen-Shannon divergence: 0.06-0.08). BLEU scores indicated moderate lexical variation (0.14-0.19), reflecting distinct but contextually consistent phrasing. With full datasets, synthetic augmentation did not meaningfully affect classifier performance. Under data-scarce conditions retaining 5% of positive training cases while preserving the full negative training set, the area under the curve improved from 0.915 (SD 0.056) to 0.929 (SD 0.033) for cleft lip and from 0.935 (SD 0.036) to 0.949 (SD 0.033) for cleft palate, with smaller gains for ABG (mean 0.983, SD 0.014 to mean 0.987, SD 0.015). When retaining 10% of positive training cases, performance changes were minor across procedures (cleft lip: mean 0.952, SD 0.036 to mean 0.948, SD 0.028; cleft palate: mean 0.945, SD 0.044 to mean 0.956, SD 0.036; and ABG: mean 0.989, SD 0.008 to mean 0.985, SD 0.012). Conclusions: LLM-generated operative notes exhibit strong semantic and syntactic fidelity to authentic documentation and can enhance model performance in a task-dependent manner when authentic data are limited. These findings suggest that synthetic data generation may address data scarcity challenges in specialized surgical domains, particularly for rare or underrepresented procedures, enabling robust machine learning model development.

Indexed as

Large Language ModelsLinguisticsNatural Language ProcessingClassification AlgorithmsCleft LipCleft PalateHumansMachine LearningReproducibility of ResultsAIartificial intelligencecleft lipcleft palatelarge language modelsmachine learningnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID42397952
PMCPMC13331248

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.