Viability of Open Large Language Models for Clinical Documentation in German Health Care: Real-World Model Evaluation Study.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Felix Heilmeyer, Daniel Böhringer, Thomas Reinhard, Sebastian Arens, Lisa Lyssenko, Christian Haverkamp
{"title":"Viability of Open Large Language Models for Clinical Documentation in German Health Care: Real-World Model Evaluation Study.","authors":"Felix Heilmeyer, Daniel Böhringer, Thomas Reinhard, Sebastian Arens, Lisa Lyssenko, Christian Haverkamp","doi":"10.2196/59617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of large language models (LLMs) as writing assistance for medical professionals is a promising approach to reduce the time required for documentation, but there may be practical, ethical, and legal challenges in many jurisdictions complicating the use of the most powerful commercial LLM solutions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In this study, we assessed the feasibility of using nonproprietary LLMs of the GPT variety as writing assistance for medical professionals in an on-premise setting with restricted compute resources, generating German medical text.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We trained four 7-billion-parameter models with 3 different architectures for our task and evaluated their performance using a powerful commercial LLM, namely Anthropic's Claude-v2, as a rater. Based on this, we selected the best-performing model and evaluated its practical usability with 2 independent human raters on real-world data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the automated evaluation with Claude-v2, BLOOM-CLP-German, a model trained from scratch on the German text, achieved the best results. In the manual evaluation by human experts, 95 (93.1%) of the 102 reports generated by that model were evaluated as usable as is or with only minor changes by both human raters.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results show that even with restricted compute resources, it is possible to generate medical texts that are suitable for documentation in routine clinical practice. However, the target language should be considered in the model selection when processing non-English text.</p>","PeriodicalId":56334,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Informatics","volume":"12 ","pages":"e59617"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11373371/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/59617","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of large language models (LLMs) as writing assistance for medical professionals is a promising approach to reduce the time required for documentation, but there may be practical, ethical, and legal challenges in many jurisdictions complicating the use of the most powerful commercial LLM solutions.

Objective: In this study, we assessed the feasibility of using nonproprietary LLMs of the GPT variety as writing assistance for medical professionals in an on-premise setting with restricted compute resources, generating German medical text.

Methods: We trained four 7-billion-parameter models with 3 different architectures for our task and evaluated their performance using a powerful commercial LLM, namely Anthropic's Claude-v2, as a rater. Based on this, we selected the best-performing model and evaluated its practical usability with 2 independent human raters on real-world data.

Results: In the automated evaluation with Claude-v2, BLOOM-CLP-German, a model trained from scratch on the German text, achieved the best results. In the manual evaluation by human experts, 95 (93.1%) of the 102 reports generated by that model were evaluated as usable as is or with only minor changes by both human raters.

Conclusions: The results show that even with restricted compute resources, it is possible to generate medical texts that are suitable for documentation in routine clinical practice. However, the target language should be considered in the model selection when processing non-English text.

开放式大型语言模型在德国医疗保健临床文档中的可行性:真实世界模型评估研究
背景:使用大型语言模型(LLMs)作为医疗专业人员的写作辅助工具是一种很有前途的方法,可以减少文档撰写所需的时间,但在许多司法管辖区,使用功能最强大的商业 LLM 解决方案可能会面临实际、道德和法律方面的挑战:在本研究中,我们评估了在计算资源有限的内部环境中使用 GPT 类型的非专有 LLM 作为医学专业人员写作辅助工具的可行性,并生成了德语医学文本:针对我们的任务,我们使用 3 种不同的架构训练了 4 个 70 亿参数模型,并使用功能强大的商用 LLM(即 Anthropic 的 Claude-v2)作为评分器评估了它们的性能。在此基础上,我们选出了表现最佳的模型,并由两名独立的人类评测员对其在真实世界数据中的实际可用性进行了评估:在使用 Claude-v2 进行的自动评估中,根据德语文本从头开始训练的 BLOOM-CLP-German 模型取得了最佳结果。在由人类专家进行的人工评估中,该模型生成的 102 份报告中有 95 份(93.1%)被两位人类评估员评为可用,或只需稍作修改即可使用:结果表明,即使计算资源有限,也有可能生成适合常规临床实践文档的医学文本。然而,在处理非英语文本时,在选择模型时应考虑目标语言。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Medical Informatics
JMIR Medical Informatics Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
173
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR Medical Informatics (JMI, ISSN 2291-9694) is a top-rated, tier A journal which focuses on clinical informatics, big data in health and health care, decision support for health professionals, electronic health records, ehealth infrastructures and implementation. It has a focus on applied, translational research, with a broad readership including clinicians, CIOs, engineers, industry and health informatics professionals. Published by JMIR Publications, publisher of the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR), the leading eHealth/mHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175), JMIR Med Inform has a slightly different scope (emphasizing more on applications for clinicians and health professionals rather than consumers/citizens, which is the focus of JMIR), publishes even faster, and also allows papers which are more technical or more formative than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信