Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 8 minor 53 references

Structured Extraction of Real World Medical Knowledge using LLMs for Summarization and Search

T0 review · 4 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A patient knowledge graph built by LLM extraction can flag undiagnosed rare disease patients, as demonstrated by searching 33.6 million EHR records for BPAN.

desk verdict Solid benchmark survey and an interesting rare-disease search use case, but the headline BPAN discovery is an unvalidated hypothesis built on an undisclosed scoring method with n=2 positives. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15256 v1 pith:Y4FWBXAH submitted 2024-12-16 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

Edward Kim , Manil Shrestha , Richard Foty , Tom DeLay , Vicki Seyfert-Margolis This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG
keywords largelanguagemodelsknowledgegraphsontologymappingstructuredextractionDravetsyndromeBPANHumanPhenotypeelectronichealthrecords
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that large language models can replace rigid medical coding as the front end of patient search: instead of matching patients to exact ICD-10 or SNOMED codes, an LLM reads unstructured clinical notes and extracts symptom entities, which are then grounded in standard ontologies and assembled into a per-patient knowledge graph. The authors validate the extraction pipeline on public benchmark corpora for named-entity recognition, multi-label phenotype classification, and HPO term mapping, and then apply it to two rare diseases in a 33.6-million-patient ambulatory EHR database. Using 38 ICD-10-confirmed Dravet syndrome patients as ground truth, they show that their extracted HPO phenotype frequencies broadly track the frequencies the HPO assigns to the disease. They then run the same method on BPAN, a rare disease with no ICD-10 code, and report narrowing a search of over 24,000 candidates with generic epilepsy- and development-related codes to 12 patients they describe as very high probability undiagnosed BPAN cases. If the result holds, the approach would give researchers a scalable way to find and study rare disease patients years before coding systems catch up.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the patient-specific knowledge graph: a directed labeled graph in which clinical entities (patients, symptoms, diagnoses, treatments) are nodes and their relationships are edges, with the unstructured text of medical notes attached as node attributes. The extraction step is a single LLM prompt that takes a patient's history and a list of candidate HPO terms, and returns a JSON structure per patient listing each matched HPO identifier with a confidence score and a reasoning sentence. HPO (Human Phenotype Ontology) supplies the standardized vocabulary of over 13,000 phenotype terms that anchors the extraction and makes different patients comparable. For the BPAN ranking, a proprietary method (not described) converts each candidate's knowledge graph into a 0-9 likelihood score, and the top-scoring patients are re-extracted for phenotypic review. The machinery's role is to convert free-text evidence into a searchable, ontology-anchored representation that can be filtered by symptom rather than by code.

What would settle it

Enroll the 12 candidate patients and a matched random sample of the remaining 24,000 generic-code patients in a blinded neurological evaluation or WDR45 gene test; if the 12 do not show a markedly higher BPAN rate than the 24,000-patient pool, the ranking carries no discriminative information. A simpler check is to re-score the patients after removing all information from the two known BPAN cases from the ranking procedure; if the top 12 shift completely, the method was overfit.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that a patient knowledge graph grounded in HPO, MeSH, SNOMED-CT, and RxNORM, with nodes extracted by LLM prompting from unstructured notes, is a workable search index for rare disease discovery. The evidence has two parts. In the Dravet syndrome case, the method extracts 48 HPO phenotypes from the notes of 38 ICD-10-coded patients and compares the observed frequencies with HPO's standard frequencies, finding broad agreement: the most frequent real-world phenotypes (complex febrile seizure, febrile seizure, cognitive impairment) match HPO's expectations, while head, neck, and limb presentations are largely absent from the notes. In the BPAN case, there is no ground truth: after a keyword search finds only two confirmed patients, the authors broaden to six generic ICD-10 codes covering 24,000 patients, score each with a proprietary 0-9 likelihood method, and report that a knowledge-graph review of the 268 patients scoring 7 to 9 reduces the list to 12 very high probability undiagnosed BPAN cases. The paper therefore claims that phenotype-based search via LLM extraction can identify rare disease patients whose condition has no codified diagnosis.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the assumption that the undisclosed proprietary 0-9 BPAN scoring is calibrated and not overfit to the two known BPAN patients, and that the LLM-extracted HPO terms are accurate enough to support the final ranking, with no measured precision for the real-world extraction and no clinical confirmation of the 12 finalists.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Rare diseases without their own ICD-10 code become searchable by phenotype, so patient recruitment for trials and natural-history studies can start years earlier.
  • The observed mismatch between HPO's reference frequencies and the frequencies in real-world notes suggests ontology entries should be updated with data-driven evidence, not only expert curation.
  • The same extraction pipeline can be reused across diseases by swapping the candidate HPO list, so the marginal cost of adding a new disease search is low.
  • Documentation artifacts are visible in the frequency comparison, which means the method could also serve as a quality signal for EHR note completeness.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The 12 BPAN candidates have no clinical confirmation, so the paper's headline number is an unvalidated prediction; a chart review or WDR45 genetic test would be the decisive next experiment.
  • Because the 0-9 scoring method is proprietary and undisclosed, the result cannot be independently reproduced; replacing it with a published algorithm would turn the pipeline into a testable baseline.
  • The same approach could be applied to a disease with delayed code adoption, using notes written before the code existed, to test retrospectively how many 'undiagnosed' patients the method recovers once the code appears.
  • The absence of head, neck, and limb phenotypes in the Dravet notes may reflect documentation bias in ambulatory care rather than true phenotype rarity; linking extraction to structured exam fields would separate those possibilities.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a pipeline for constructing patient-specific knowledge graphs from unstructured EHR notes using LLM-based extraction, with extracted entities mapped to standard ontologies (MeSH, SNOMED-CT, RxNORM, HPO). The method is benchmarked on three public tasks: BC5CDR chemical/disease NER (Table I), MIMIC-III multi-label phenotype classification (Table II), and BiolarkGSC+ HPO extraction and mapping (Table III). The authors then apply the approach to two rare diseases in a 33.6M-patient ambulatory EHR dataset. For Dravet syndrome, they use 38 patients with ICD-10 codes as ground truth, extract 46 HPO phenotypes per patient, and compare observed phenotype frequencies with HPO frequency categories. For BPAN, where no ICD-10 code exists, they identify two patients via a keyword search, use a proprietary 0-9 likelihood rating over roughly 24k patients matching six generic ICD-10 codes, and report having narrowed the list to 12 'very high probability cases of BPAN.' The central contribution is the claim that LLM-based HPO extraction plus a proprietary scoring method can discover undiagnosed rare-disease patients in real-world EHR data.

Significance. If the BPAN discovery claim were properly supported, this would be a meaningful demonstration of using LLM-based phenotype extraction for rare-disease cohort discovery in a very large EHR database. The public benchmark work is a genuine strength: it covers three standard datasets, multiple model families, static and dynamic few-shot prompting, LoRA fine-tuning, and gleaning, with clear tables that allow comparison with prior systems. The authors also honestly report negative or mixed lessons, including their inability to reproduce PhenoGPT's full improvement and their skepticism about narrow fine-tuning generalization. However, the significance of the paper's headline result is currently conditional: the BPAN discovery rests on an undisclosed proprietary scoring method, calibrated against only two keyword-identified patients, with no reported precision, recall, calibration, or clinical validation. The Dravet frequency analysis also lacks manual validation of the LLM extractions. These issues must be resolved before the paper's real-world discovery claims can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [V] The BPAN discovery claim ('We were able to finally narrow this patient list down to 12 very high probability cases of BPAN') is the paper's headline result, but the evidence presented in Section V does not support it. The proprietary 0-9 rating method is not described, and the only apparent positives available for designing or calibrating it are two patients found by a keyword search for 'BPAN' in clinical notes. No precision, recall, AUC, or calibration statistic is reported for the ranking, and the final 12 candidates have no clinical confirmation, molecular (WDR45) follow-up, or manual chart review. With roughly 24k patients in the pool, identifying 12 true positives requires extremely high specificity, which cannot be established from two positive examples. Please disclose the scoring method, validate it on labeled positives and negatives, report calibration at the chosen threshold, and either provide independent confirmation of the 12 candidates or explicitly re-label them as unverified computational candidates rather than 'very high probability cases.'
  2. [IV-C and Table IV] The Dravet HPO extraction results are presented as if they are measurements, but no manual validation or precision/recall analysis is reported for the LLM extractions on the 38 real-world patients. Table IV lists patient counts per HPO term, and Figure 3 compares those counts against HPO frequency categories, yet there is no evidence that the extracted terms match the patients' actual records. Without a manual chart-review sample or inter-annotator agreement, the observed frequency discrepancies may reflect extraction errors rather than true phenotype presentation. Please report a validation set of the extracted HPO terms against clinician annotation or at least a random sample of patient charts, and discuss how the prompt's inclusion of the Dravet syndrome description may bias extraction.
  3. [IV-D and Figure 3] The comparison between HPO frequencies and observed frequencies in the 38 Dravet patients is not statistically grounded. HPO frequency categories are coarse ranges (e.g., Frequent means 30-79%), while Table IV reports raw counts in a 38-patient cohort, and rows marked '-' are ambiguous (zero, not extracted, or not applicable). Figure 3 appears to be a heat map, but the text does not define its axes, color scale, or the denominator used for observed frequencies. This makes it impossible to assess whether the claimed differences between HPO annotations and real-world data are meaningful. Please specify how unmentioned phenotypes were handled, provide confidence intervals or exact tests for the observed proportions, and clarify the figure's construction.
  4. [V] The two 'confirmed' BPAN patients are identified only by a keyword search for the string 'BPAN' in unstructured notes. The manuscript does not state whether these patients have genetic confirmation, a clinical diagnosis documented by a specialist, or merely a note mentioning BPAN in a differential or rule-out context. Because these two patients are the sole anchor points for the proprietary scoring method, the meaning of 'confirmed' is load-bearing. Please describe how confirmation was established and how the two index patients were separated from other notes that might mention BPAN without having the disease.
minor comments (8)
  1. [II-D] The phrase 'RH's test dataset' is confusing because the 33.6M-patient EHR resource is not a machine-learning test set; please call it a de-identified research dataset or real-world database.
  2. [Table IV] The column labeled 'Frequency' actually contains patient counts; please rename it 'Patient count' or 'Patients with HPO term (n=38).' Also, replace the '-' entries with 0 or 'not observed' so the table is unambiguous.
  3. [III-C] The dataset name appears as both 'BiolarkGSC+' and 'Bio-Lark Gold Standard Corpus'; please standardize the spelling to 'Bio-Lark GSC+' and cite the original dataset description.
  4. [III-C] For the LoRA fine-tuning, only rank (64) and epochs (2) are reported; please add learning rate, LoRA alpha/dropout, quantization details, and the validation procedure so the experiment is reproducible.
  5. [Figure 3] The heat map is described only in a caption and lacks visible axis labels, a color scale, and a description of how missing HPO terms were treated; without these, the figure is not interpretable.
  6. [IV-B, Figure 2 caption] The caption says the knowledge graph consists of 'structured elements from the EHR, as well as a dearth of unstructured information in the medical notes'; this appears to be a typo, since the paper elsewhere emphasizes extensive unstructured notes. Please replace 'dearth' with 'body' or 'wealth.'
  7. [V] The manuscript says 'We then utilize a proprietary method' without defining the 0-9 score's anchors, inputs, or threshold; at minimum, please state what a score of 7-9 means and how the threshold was chosen.
  8. [Appendix, Listing 1] The prompt instructs the model to output reasoning for each HPO match, but the response format also says 'NO additional fields beyond the specified format'; please reconcile this minor inconsistency.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No demonstrated circularity; the extraction pipeline is benchmarked against external corpora, and the opaque BPAN scoring method is an evidence gap rather than a shown reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular in any way that can be exhibited from its text. Experiments 1-3 (BC5CDR, MIMIC-III, BiolarkGSC+) evaluate LLM extraction against external benchmarks with no fitted parameter drawn from the downstream rare-disease targets; the Dravet case study uses ICD-10-confirmed patients as ground truth; and the BPAN exercise begins from a keyword search for the disease name. The main weakness is Section V's 'proprietary method' that rates about 24k patients 0-9: because its implementation is undisclosed, one cannot quote a specific equation or fitted parameter showing that the 12 final candidates are forced by the two index patients. That is a validation and transparency problem, not a demonstrated circularity. The only self-citations ([32], a prior HPO embedding paper including an author, and [34], the authors' company) are contextual and not load-bearing for the benchmark or discovery claims. Accordingly the score is 1.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the reliability of LLM phenotype extraction, the correctness of ICD-10 as ground truth for Dravet, and the validity of an undisclosed BPAN scoring function. The paper uses external benchmarks and ontologies as grounding, so no free-floating invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • BPAN score threshold = 7-9 out of 9
    Patients above this threshold were kept for knowledge graph analysis and later narrowed to 12; the threshold is chosen without reported optimization or validation.
  • RAG top-k = 5
    Dynamic few-shot retrieves top 5 similar abstracts by cosine similarity; used in all benchmark experiments.
  • LoRA rank and epochs = rank 64, 2 epochs
    Chosen for fine-tuning Llama3.1-Nemo-70B on HPO extraction; more epochs hurt performance according to the paper.
  • Confidence threshold = not specified
    LLMs output a confidence score 0-1 per HPO, but the paper does not state a threshold used to include or exclude phenotypes in Table IV.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption ICD-10 codes G40.83, G40.833, G40.834 are a correct ground truth for Dravet syndrome
    Used to define the 38-patient cohort in Section IV-B; coding errors or undercoding would bias frequency comparisons.
  • domain assumption HPO frequency annotations reflect the true population frequency of phenotypes in the disease
    Figure 3 compares extracted frequencies to HPO reference frequencies; the ontology annotations are treated as ground truth.
  • domain assumption EHR unstructured notes contain sufficient phenotype information
    The whole real-world pipeline depends on clinical notes recording relevant symptoms; absence of a mention is treated as absence of the phenotype in frequency comparisons.
  • domain assumption The two keyword-confirmed BPAN patients are correctly diagnosed
    They anchor the six generic ICD-10 codes used to broaden the search in Section V; misdiagnosis would poison the subsequent ranking.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Structured Extraction of Real World Medical Knowledge using LLMs for Summarization and Search." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y4FWBXAH

@misc{pith2026241215256,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Structured Extraction of Real World Medical Knowledge using LLMs for Summarization and Search},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y4FWBXAH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15256}
}
read the original abstract

Creation and curation of knowledge graphs can accelerate disease discovery and analysis in real-world data. While disease ontologies aid in biological data annotation, codified categories (SNOMED-CT, ICD10, CPT) may not capture patient condition nuances or rare diseases. Multiple disease definitions across data sources complicate ontology mapping and disease clustering. We propose creating patient knowledge graphs using large language model extraction techniques, allowing data extraction via natural language rather than rigid ontological hierarchies. Our method maps to existing ontologies (MeSH, SNOMED-CT, RxNORM, HPO) to ground extracted entities. Using a large ambulatory care EHR database with 33.6M patients, we demonstrate our method through the patient search for Dravet syndrome, which received ICD10 recognition in October 2020. We describe our construction of patient-specific knowledge graphs and symptom-based patient searches. Using confirmed Dravet syndrome ICD10 codes as ground truth, we employ LLM-based entity extraction to characterize patients in grounded ontologies. We then apply this method to identify Beta-propeller protein-associated neurodegeneration (BPAN) patients, demonstrating real-world discovery where no ground truth exists.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.15256 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visualization of knowledge graph construction and phenotype extrac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Visualization of the knowledge graph of 38 ICD-10 coded patients with Dravet. The knowledge graph consists of both structured elements from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Heat map of frequencies of presentation in the HPO and frequencies present in real-world Dravet syndrome patients. Comparison between the two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Towards a definition of knowledge graphs

    Lisa Ehrlinger and Wolfram W ¨oß. Towards a definition of knowledge graphs. SEMANTiCS (Posters, Demos, SuCCESS) , 48:1–4, 2016

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Industry-scale knowledge graphs: Lessons and challenges

    Natasha Noy, Yuqing Gao, Anshu Jain, Anant Narayanan, Alan Patter- son, and Jamie Taylor. Industry-scale knowledge graphs: Lessons and challenges. Communications of the ACM , 62(8):36–43, 2019

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Knowledge graphs

    Aidan Hogan, Eva Blomqvist, Michael Cochez, Claudia d’Amato, Gerard de Melo, Claudio Gutierrez, Sabrina Kirrane, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo, Roberto Navigli, Sebastian Neumaier, et al. Knowledge graphs. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) , 54(4):1–37, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    A survey on knowledge graphs: Representation, acquisition, and applications

    Shaoxiong Ji, Shirui Pan, Erik Cambria, Pekka Marttinen, and Samuel Yang Philip. A survey on knowledge graphs: Representation, acquisition, and applications. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 33(2):494–514, 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    The unified medical language system (umls): integrating biomedical terminology

    Olivier Bodenreider. The unified medical language system (umls): integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic acids research , 32(suppl 1):D267–D270, 2004

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology

    Michael Ashburner, Catherine A Ball, Judith A Blake, David Botstein, Heather Butler, J Michael Cherry, Allan P Davis, Kara Dolinski, Selina S Dwight, Janan T Eppig, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nature genetics, 25(1):25–29, 2000

    2000

  7. [7]

    Disgenet: a comprehensive platform integrating information on human disease-associated genes and variants

    Janet Pi ˜nero, `Alex Bravo, N ´uria Queralt-Rosinach, Alba Guti ´errez- Sacrist´an, Jordi Deu-Pons, Emilio Centeno, Javier Garc´ıa-Garc´ıa, Ferran Sanz, and Laura I Furlong. Disgenet: a comprehensive platform integrating information on human disease-associated genes and variants. Nucleic acids research, page gkw943, 2016

    2016

  8. [8]

    Drugbank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration

    David S Wishart, Craig Knox, An Chi Guo, Savita Shrivastava, Murtaza Hassanali, Paul Stothard, Zhan Chang, and Jennifer Woolsey. Drugbank: a comprehensive resource for in silico drug discovery and exploration. Nucleic acids research, 34(suppl 1):D668–D672, 2006

    work page 2006

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Drugbank 5.0: a major update to the drugbank database for 2018

    David S Wishart, Yannick D Feunang, An C Guo, Elvis J Lo, Ana Marcu, Jason R Grant, Tanvir Sajed, Daniel Johnson, Carin Li, Zinat Sayeeda, et al. Drugbank 5.0: a major update to the drugbank database for 2018. Nucleic acids research, 46(D1):D1074–D1082, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    Drugbank 6.0: the drugbank knowledgebase for 2024

    Craig Knox, Mike Wilson, Christen M Klinger, Mark Franklin, Eponine Oler, Alex Wilson, Allison Pon, Jordan Cox, Na Eun Chin, Seth A Strawbridge, et al. Drugbank 6.0: the drugbank knowledgebase for 2024. Nucleic acids research, 52(D1):D1265–D1275, 2024

    2024

  3. [11]

    Effective mapping of biomedical text to the umls metathesaurus: the metamap program

    Alan R Aronson. Effective mapping of biomedical text to the umls metathesaurus: the metamap program. In Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium, page 17. American Medical Informatics Association, 2001

    2001

  4. [12]

    Dnorm: dis- ease name normalization with pairwise learning to rank

    Robert Leaman, Rezarta Islamaj Do ˘gan, and Zhiyong Lu. Dnorm: dis- ease name normalization with pairwise learning to rank. Bioinformatics, 29(22):2909–2917, 2013

    2013

  5. [13]

    Attention is all you need

    A Vaswani. Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017

    2017

  6. [14]

    Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language un- derstanding

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language un- derstanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 , 2018

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Biobert: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining

    Jinhyuk Lee, Wonjin Yoon, Sungdong Kim, Donghyeon Kim, Sunkyu Kim, Chan Ho So, and Jaewoo Kang. Biobert: a pre-trained biomedical language representation model for biomedical text mining. Bioinformat- ics, 36(4):1234–1240, 2020

    2020

  8. [16]

    Scibert: A pretrained language model for scientific text

    Iz Beltagy, Kyle Lo, and Arman Cohan. Scibert: A pretrained language model for scientific text. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.10676 , 2019

    1903 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Publicly available clinical bert embeddings

    Emily Alsentzer, John R Murphy, Willie Boag, Wei-Hung Weng, Di Jin, Tristan Naumann, and Matthew McDermott. Publicly available clinical bert embeddings. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.03323 , 2019

    1904 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Domain-specific language model pretraining for biomedical natural language processing

    Yu Gu, Robert Tinn, Hao Cheng, Michael Lucas, Naoto Usuyama, Xiaodong Liu, Tristan Naumann, Jianfeng Gao, and Hoifung Poon. Domain-specific language model pretraining for biomedical natural language processing. ACM Transactions on Computing for Healthcare (HEALTH), 3(1):1–23, 2021

    2021

  11. [19]

    Biogpt: generative pre-trained transformer for biomedical text generation and mining

    Renqian Luo, Liai Sun, Yingce Xia, Tao Qin, Sheng Zhang, Hoifung Poon, and Tie-Yan Liu. Biogpt: generative pre-trained transformer for biomedical text generation and mining. Briefings in bioinformatics , 23(6):bbac409, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Enhancing phenotype recognition in clinical notes using large language models: Phenobcbert and phenogpt

    Jingye Yang, Cong Liu, Wendy Deng, Da Wu, Chunhua Weng, Yunyun Zhou, and Kai Wang. Enhancing phenotype recognition in clinical notes using large language models: Phenobcbert and phenogpt. Patterns, 5(1), 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    Large language models are few-shot clinical information extractors

    Monica Agrawal, Stefan Hegselmann, Hunter Lang, Yoon Kim, and David Sontag. Large language models are few-shot clinical information extractors. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.12689 , 2022

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Large language models for biomedical knowledge graph construction: Information extraction from emr notes

    Vahan Arsenyan, Spartak Bughdaryan, Fadi Shaya, Kent Small, and Davit Shahnazaryan. Large language models for biomedical knowledge graph construction: Information extraction from emr notes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12473, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Automating the expansion of a knowledge graph

    SoYeop Yoo and OkRan Jeong. Automating the expansion of a knowledge graph. Expert Systems with Applications , 141:112965, 2020

    2020

  16. [24]

    On faithfulness and factuality in abstractive summarization

    Joshua Maynez, Shashi Narayan, Bernd Bohnet, and Ryan McDonald. On faithfulness and factuality in abstractive summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.00661, 2020

    2005 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Graph-constrained reasoning: Faithful reasoning on knowledge graphs with large language models

    Linhao Luo, Zicheng Zhao, Chen Gong, Gholamreza Haffari, and Shirui Pan. Graph-constrained reasoning: Faithful reasoning on knowledge graphs with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.13080 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Current procedural terminology: Cpt

    American Medical Association. Current procedural terminology: Cpt. American Medical Association , 1966

    1966

  19. [27]

    International Statistical Classification of Diseases and related health problems: Alphabetical index , volume 3

    World Health Organization. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and related health problems: Alphabetical index , volume 3. World Health Organization, 2004

    2004

  20. [28]

    Snomed-ct: The advanced terminology and coding system for ehealth

    Kevin Donnelly et al. Snomed-ct: The advanced terminology and coding system for ehealth. Studies in health technology and informatics, 121:279, 2006

    2006

  21. [29]

    The human phenotype ontology: a tool for annotating and analyzing human hereditary disease

    Peter N Robinson, Sebastian K ¨ohler, Sebastian Bauer, Dominik Seelow, Denise Horn, and Stefan Mundlos. The human phenotype ontology: a tool for annotating and analyzing human hereditary disease. The American Journal of Human Genetics , 83(5):610–615, 2008

    2008

  22. [30]

    Normalized names for clinical drugs: Rxnorm at 6 years

    Stuart J Nelson, Kelly Zeng, John Kilbourne, Tammy Powell, and Robin Moore. Normalized names for clinical drugs: Rxnorm at 6 years. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association , 18(4):441–448, 2011

    2011

  23. [31]

    Phenobert: a combined deep learning method for automated recognition of human phenotype ontology

    Yuhao Feng, Lei Qi, and Weidong Tian. Phenobert: a combined deep learning method for automated recognition of human phenotype ontology. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, 20(2):1269–1277, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    Enriching representation learning using 53 million patient notes through human phenotype ontology embedding

    Maryam Daniali, Peter D Galer, David Lewis-Smith, Shridhar Parthasarathy, Edward Kim, Dario D Salvucci, Jeffrey M Miller, Scott Haag, and Ingo Helbig. Enriching representation learning using 53 million patient notes through human phenotype ontology embedding. Artificial intell...

    2023

  25. [33]

    Phenotype annotations for patient notes in the mimic-iii database

    Edward Moseley, Leo Anthony Celi, Joy Wu, and Franck Dernoncourt. Phenotype annotations for patient notes in the mimic-iii database. PhysioNet, 2020

    2020

  26. [34]

    Respond.health – clinical discovery that responds to the real world

    Respond Health. Respond.health – clinical discovery that responds to the real world. Accessed: 2024-11-03

    2024

  27. [35]

    Biocreative v cdr task corpus: a resource for chemical disease relation extraction

    Jiao Li, Yueping Sun, Robin J Johnson, Daniela Sciaky, Chih-Hsuan Wei, Robert Leaman, Allan Peter Davis, Carolyn J Mattingly, Thomas C Wiegers, and Zhiyong Lu. Biocreative v cdr task corpus: a resource for chemical disease relation extraction. Database, 2016, 2016

    2016

  28. [36]

    Ncbi disease corpus: a resource for disease name recognition and concept normaliza- tion

    Rezarta Islamaj Do ˘gan, Robert Leaman, and Zhiyong Lu. Ncbi disease corpus: a resource for disease name recognition and concept normaliza- tion. Journal of biomedical informatics , 47:1–10, 2014

    2014

  29. [37]

    Named entity recognition and normalization in biomedical literature: a practical case in SARS-CoV-2 literature

    ´Alvaro Alonso Casero. Named entity recognition and normalization in biomedical literature: a practical case in SARS-CoV-2 literature . PhD thesis, ETSI Informatica, 2021

    2021

  30. [38]

    Scispacy: fast and robust models for biomedical natural language processing

    Mark Neumann, Daniel King, Iz Beltagy, and Waleed Ammar. Scispacy: fast and robust models for biomedical natural language processing. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.07669, 2019

    1902 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Language models are few-shot learners

    Tom B Brown. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165, 2020

    2005 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Helpsteer2- preference: Complementing ratings with preferences, 2024

    Zhilin Wang, Alexander Bukharin, Olivier Delalleau, Daniel Egert, Gerald Shen, Jiaqi Zeng, Oleksii Kuchaiev, and Yi Dong. Helpsteer2- preference: Complementing ratings with preferences, 2024

    2024

  33. [41]

    Qwen2.5: A party of foundation models, September 2024

    Qwen Team. Qwen2.5: A party of foundation models, September 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    mgte: Generalized long-context text representation and reranking models for multilingual text retrieval

    Xin Zhang, Yanzhao Zhang, Dingkun Long, Wen Xie, Ziqi Dai, Jialong Tang, Huan Lin, Baosong Yang, Pengjun Xie, Fei Huang, et al. mgte: Generalized long-context text representation and reranking models for multilingual text retrieval. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.19669 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Physiobank, physiotoolkit, and physionet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals

    Ary L Goldberger, Luis AN Amaral, Leon Glass, Jeffrey M Hausdorff, Plamen Ch Ivanov, Roger G Mark, Joseph E Mietus, George B Moody, Chung-Kang Peng, and H Eugene Stanley. Physiobank, physiotoolkit, and physionet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic si...

    2000

  36. [44]

    Mimic-iii, a freely accessible critical care database

    Alistair EW Johnson, Tom J Pollard, Lu Shen, Li-wei H Lehman, Mengling Feng, Mohammad Ghassemi, Benjamin Moody, Peter Szolovits, Leo Anthony Celi, and Roger G Mark. Mimic-iii, a freely accessible critical care database. Scientific data, 3(1):1–9, 2016

    2016

  37. [45]

    Comparing deep learning and concept ex- traction based methods for patient phenotyping from clinical narratives

    Sebastian Gehrmann, Franck Dernoncourt, Yeran Li, Eric T Carlson, Joy T Wu, Jonathan Welt, John Foote Jr, Edward T Moseley, David W Grant, Patrick D Tyler, et al. Comparing deep learning and concept ex- traction based methods for patient phenotyping from clinical narratives. P...

    2018

  38. [46]

    Less annotating, more classifying: Addressing the data scarcity issue of supervised machine learning with deep transfer learning and bert-nli

    Moritz Laurer, Wouter Van Atteveldt, Andreu Casas, and Kasper Wel- bers. Less annotating, more classifying: Addressing the data scarcity issue of supervised machine learning with deep transfer learning and bert-nli. Political Analysis, 32(1):84–100, 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    Responsible use of mimic data with online services like gpt,

    PhysioNet. Responsible use of mimic data with online services like gpt,

  40. [48]

    Phenorerank: A re-ranking model for phenotypic concept recognition pre-trained on human phenotype ontology

    Shankai Yan, Ling Luo, Po-Ting Lai, Daniel Veltri, Andrew J Oler, Sandhya Xirasagar, Rajarshi Ghosh, Morgan Similuk, Peter N Robinson, and Zhiyong Lu. Phenorerank: A re-ranking model for phenotypic concept recognition pre-trained on human phenotype ontology. Journal of biomedi...

    2022

  41. [49]

    Doc2hpo: a web application for efficient and accurate hpo concept curation

    Cong Liu, Fabricio Sampaio Peres Kury, Ziran Li, Casey Ta, Kai Wang, and Chunhua Weng. Doc2hpo: a web application for efficient and accurate hpo concept curation. Nucleic acids research, 47(W1):W566– W570, 2019

    2019

  42. [50]

    Clinphen extracts and prioritizes patient phenotypes directly from medical records to expedite genetic disease diagnosis

    Cole A Deisseroth, Johannes Birgmeier, Ethan E Bodle, Jennefer N Kohler, Dena R Matalon, Yelena Nazarenko, Casie A Genetti, Cather- ine A Brownstein, Klaus Schmitz-Abe, Kelly Schoch, et al. Clinphen extracts and prioritizes patient phenotypes directly from medical records to e...

    2019

  43. [51]

    Phenotagger: a hybrid method for phenotype concept recognition using human phenotype ontology

    Ling Luo, Shankai Yan, Po-Ting Lai, Daniel Veltri, Andrew Oler, Sandhya Xirasagar, Rajarshi Ghosh, Morgan Similuk, Peter N Robin- son, and Zhiyong Lu. Phenotagger: a hybrid method for phenotype concept recognition using human phenotype ontology. Bioinformatics, 37(13):1884–1890, 2021

    2021

  44. [52]

    < PATIENT_KEY >

    Darren Edge, Ha Trinh, Newman Cheng, Joshua Bradley, Alex Chao, Apurva Mody, Steven Truitt, and Jonathan Larson. From local to global: A graph rag approach to query-focused summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16130, 2024. APPENDIX 1 You are an expert in mapping clinical p...

    2024 arXiv

  45. [2023]

    Accessed: 2024-11-03

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.