Summarize-then-Prompt: A Novel Prompt Engineering Strategy for Generating High-Quality Discharge Summaries.

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Eyal Klang, Jaskirat Gill, Aniket Sharma, Evan Leibner, Moein Sabounchi, Robert Freeman, Roopa Kohli-Seth, Patricia Kovatch, Alexander Charney, Lisa Stump, David Reich, Girish Nadkarni, Ankit Sakhuja
{"title":"Summarize-then-Prompt: A Novel Prompt Engineering Strategy for Generating High-Quality Discharge Summaries.","authors":"Eyal Klang, Jaskirat Gill, Aniket Sharma, Evan Leibner, Moein Sabounchi, Robert Freeman, Roopa Kohli-Seth, Patricia Kovatch, Alexander Charney, Lisa Stump, David Reich, Girish Nadkarni, Ankit Sakhuja","doi":"10.1055/a-2617-6572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurate discharge summaries are essential for effective communication between hospital and outpatient providers but generating them is labor-intensive. Large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, have shown promise in automating this process, potentially reducing clinician workload and improving documentation quality. A recent study using GPT-4 to generate discharge summaries via concatenated clinical notes found that while the summaries were concise and coherent, they often lacked comprehensiveness and contained errors. To address this, we evaluated a structured prompting strategy, summarize-then-prompt, which first generates concise summaries of individual clinical notes before combining them to create a more focused input for the LLM.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a novel prompting strategy, summarize-then-prompt, in generating discharge summaries that are more complete, accurate, and concise in comparison to the approach that simply concatenates clinical notes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study comparing two prompting strategies: direct concatenation (M1) and summarize-then-prompt (M2). A random sample of 50 hospital stays was selected from a large hospital system. Three attending physicians independently evaluated the generated hospital course summaries for completeness, correctness, and conciseness using a 5-point Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The summarize-then-prompt strategy outperformed direct concatenation strategy in both completeness (4.28 ± 0.63 vs. 4.01 ± 0.69, p < 0.001) and correctness (4.37 ± 0.54 vs. 4.17 ± 0.57, p = 0.002) of the summarization of the hospital course. However, the two strategies showed no significant difference in conciseness (p = 0.308).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Summarizing individual notes before concatenation improves LLM-generated discharge summaries, enhancing their completeness and accuracy without sacrificing conciseness. This approach may facilitate the integration of LLMs into clinical workflows, offering a promising strategy for automating discharge summary generation and could reduce clinician burden.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2617-6572","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Accurate discharge summaries are essential for effective communication between hospital and outpatient providers but generating them is labor-intensive. Large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, have shown promise in automating this process, potentially reducing clinician workload and improving documentation quality. A recent study using GPT-4 to generate discharge summaries via concatenated clinical notes found that while the summaries were concise and coherent, they often lacked comprehensiveness and contained errors. To address this, we evaluated a structured prompting strategy, summarize-then-prompt, which first generates concise summaries of individual clinical notes before combining them to create a more focused input for the LLM.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a novel prompting strategy, summarize-then-prompt, in generating discharge summaries that are more complete, accurate, and concise in comparison to the approach that simply concatenates clinical notes.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study comparing two prompting strategies: direct concatenation (M1) and summarize-then-prompt (M2). A random sample of 50 hospital stays was selected from a large hospital system. Three attending physicians independently evaluated the generated hospital course summaries for completeness, correctness, and conciseness using a 5-point Likert scale.

Results: The summarize-then-prompt strategy outperformed direct concatenation strategy in both completeness (4.28 ± 0.63 vs. 4.01 ± 0.69, p < 0.001) and correctness (4.37 ± 0.54 vs. 4.17 ± 0.57, p = 0.002) of the summarization of the hospital course. However, the two strategies showed no significant difference in conciseness (p = 0.308).

Conclusion: Summarizing individual notes before concatenation improves LLM-generated discharge summaries, enhancing their completeness and accuracy without sacrificing conciseness. This approach may facilitate the integration of LLMs into clinical workflows, offering a promising strategy for automating discharge summary generation and could reduce clinician burden.

摘要-提示:一种新的生成高质量放电摘要的提示工程策略。
背景:准确的出院摘要对于医院和门诊提供者之间的有效沟通至关重要,但生成这些摘要是一项劳动密集型工作。大型语言模型(llm),如GPT-4,在自动化这一过程中表现出了希望,有可能减少临床医生的工作量,提高文档质量。最近的一项研究使用GPT-4通过连接的临床记录生成出院摘要,发现虽然总结简洁连贯,但它们往往缺乏全面性并包含错误。为了解决这个问题,我们评估了一种结构化的提示策略,即总结-提示,该策略首先生成个人临床记录的简明摘要,然后将它们组合起来,为法学硕士创建更集中的输入。目的:本研究的目的是评估一种新型提示策略的有效性,即总结-提示,与简单地将临床记录连接起来的方法相比,它在生成更完整、准确和简洁的出院摘要方面。方法:对直接串联(M1)和总结提示(M2)两种提示策略进行回顾性比较。从一个大型医院系统中随机抽取了50个住院病例。三位主治医生使用5分李克特量表独立评估生成的医院课程总结的完整性、正确性和简洁性。结果:总结后提示策略在医院病程总结的完整性(4.28±0.63比4.01±0.69,p < 0.001)和正确性(4.37±0.54比4.17±0.57,p = 0.002)上均优于直接串联策略。但两种策略的简洁性差异无统计学意义(p = 0.308)。结论:在串联之前汇总单个笔记可以提高llm生成的出院摘要,在不牺牲简明性的情况下提高其完整性和准确性。这种方法可能有助于将llm整合到临床工作流程中,为自动生成出院摘要提供了一种有前途的策略,并可以减轻临床医生的负担。
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
Applied Clinical Informatics
Applied Clinical Informatics MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.
×
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