ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2026
Toward Responsible and Privacy-Preserving Generation of Inpatient Clinical Discharge Notes Using Large Language Models.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Writing discharge notes (DNs) is a time-intensive task in inpatient care that contributes substantially to physician workload and burnout. Large language models (LLMs) offer potential opportunities to automate clinical documentation. However, concerns regarding accuracy, reliability, data privacy protection laws and data governance, and compliance with healthcare privacy remain. This study evaluated the performance of locally deployed, domain-adapted LLMs for generating German-language DN in internal medicine. In this retrospective study, electronic health record data from a Swiss tertiary care hospital were used. Clinical information from 3 inpatient scenarios served as input for the 3 open source LLMs (Mixtral 8×7B, Mixtral 8×22B, and LLaMA 3.1 70B). Zero-shot prompting, 4-shot in-context learning, and supervised fine-tuning using QLoRA were compared. Generated DNs were evaluated using automated metrics, blinded physician assessment with direct comparison of all relevant clinical information using the modified Physician Documentation Quality Instrument, and additionally an LLM-as-a-judge framework and a Turing Test. Across all evaluation methods, the fine-tuned Mixtral 8×7B model achieved the best overall performance compared with prompting-based approaches and larger nonspecialized models. Simpler cases consistently received higher-quality ratings. Physician inter-rater agreement was low, highlighting the challenges of objective quality assessment for clinical documentation. In a Turing Test, physicians were unable to reliably distinguish artificial intelligence-generated from clinician-authored DNs, performing at chance level, demonstrating that high-quality DN generation is feasible using locally deployed LLMs within secure hospital infrastructures. Domain-specific fine-tuning substantially improves performance and may enable practical deployment. Future work should address further hallucination mitigation, robustness across medical specialties, and real-world integration.
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.