Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Do We Still Need Clinical Language Models?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2302.08091 v1 pith:KQ3PRRP5 submitted 2023-02-16 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords modelsclinicallanguagedatallmsspecializedtextgeneral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Although recent advances in scaling large language models (LLMs) have resulted in improvements on many NLP tasks, it remains unclear whether these models trained primarily with general web text are the right tool in highly specialized, safety critical domains such as clinical text. Recent results have suggested that LLMs encode a surprising amount of medical knowledge. This raises an important question regarding the utility of smaller domain-specific language models. With the success of general-domain LLMs, is there still a need for specialized clinical models? To investigate this question, we conduct an extensive empirical analysis of 12 language models, ranging from 220M to 175B parameters, measuring their performance on 3 different clinical tasks that test their ability to parse and reason over electronic health records. As part of our experiments, we train T5-Base and T5-Large models from scratch on clinical notes from MIMIC III and IV to directly investigate the efficiency of clinical tokens. We show that relatively small specialized clinical models substantially outperform all in-context learning approaches, even when finetuned on limited annotated data. Further, we find that pretraining on clinical tokens allows for smaller, more parameter-efficient models that either match or outperform much larger language models trained on general text. We release the code and the models used under the PhysioNet Credentialed Health Data license and data use agreement.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Enhancing Clinical Models with Pseudo Data for De-identification

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Continued pretraining on masked and pseudo-replaced MIMIC-III notes yields strong de-identification models, with masked RoBERTa large performing best and pseudo data helping XLM-RoBERTa more than RoBERTa.

Pith tools