Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Improving Large Language Models for Clinical Named Entity Recognition via Prompt Engineering

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 2303.16416 v3 pith:A6IGSTSI submitted 2023-03-29 cs.CL

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

Objective: This study quantifies the capabilities of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 for clinical named entity recognition (NER) tasks and proposes task-specific prompts to improve their performance. Materials and Methods: We evaluated these models on two clinical NER tasks: (1) to extract medical problems, treatments, and tests from clinical notes in the MTSamples corpus, following the 2010 i2b2 concept extraction shared task, and (2) identifying nervous system disorder-related adverse events from safety reports in the vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS). To improve the GPT models' performance, we developed a clinical task-specific prompt framework that includes (1) baseline prompts with task description and format specification, (2) annotation guideline-based prompts, (3) error analysis-based instructions, and (4) annotated samples for few-shot learning. We assessed each prompt's effectiveness and compared the models to BioClinicalBERT. Results: Using baseline prompts, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 achieved relaxed F1 scores of 0.634, 0.804 for MTSamples, and 0.301, 0.593 for VAERS. Additional prompt components consistently improved model performance. When all four components were used, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 achieved relaxed F1 socres of 0.794, 0.861 for MTSamples and 0.676, 0.736 for VAERS, demonstrating the effectiveness of our prompt framework. Although these results trail BioClinicalBERT (F1 of 0.901 for the MTSamples dataset and 0.802 for the VAERS), it is very promising considering few training samples are needed. Conclusion: While direct application of GPT models to clinical NER tasks falls short of optimal performance, our task-specific prompt framework, incorporating medical knowledge and training samples, significantly enhances GPT models' feasibility for potential clinical applications.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. FAIR_XAI: Improving Multimodal Foundation Model Fairness via Explainability for Wellbeing Assessment

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Zero-shot vision-language models are unreliable and vary widely for depression screening, and explainability-based fairness interventions often trade away accuracy without reliable fairness gains.

  2. Evaluating Named Entity Recognition Models for Russian Cultural News Texts: From BERT to LLM

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    On a 1,000-newsletter sample of Russian cultural event announcements, GPT-4.1 achieves F1=0.94 for person name recognition, slightly ahead of GPT-4o (F1=0.93 with JSON prompting).

Pith tools