关于 UMLS 在支持大语言模型提出的诊断生成鉴别诊断中的作用。

IF 4 2区 医学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Majid Afshar , Yanjun Gao , Deepak Gupta , Emma Croxford , Dina Demner-Fushman
{"title":"关于 UMLS 在支持大语言模型提出的诊断生成鉴别诊断中的作用。","authors":"Majid Afshar ,&nbsp;Yanjun Gao ,&nbsp;Deepak Gupta ,&nbsp;Emma Croxford ,&nbsp;Dina Demner-Fushman","doi":"10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective:</h3><p>Traditional knowledge-based and machine learning diagnostic decision support systems have benefited from integrating the medical domain knowledge encoded in the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) to supplant traditional systems poses questions of the quality and extent of the medical knowledge in the models’ internal knowledge representations and the need for external knowledge sources. The objective of this study is three-fold: to probe the diagnosis-related medical knowledge of popular LLMs, to examine the benefit of providing the UMLS knowledge to LLMs (grounding the diagnosis predictions), and to evaluate the correlations between human judgments and the UMLS-based metrics for generations by LLMs.</p></div><div><h3>Methods:</h3><p>We evaluated diagnoses generated by LLMs from consumer health questions and daily care notes in the electronic health records using the ConsumerQA and Problem Summarization datasets. Probing LLMs for the UMLS knowledge was performed by prompting the LLM to complete the diagnosis-related UMLS knowledge paths. Grounding the predictions was examined in an approach that integrated the UMLS graph paths and clinical notes in prompting the LLMs. The results were compared to prompting without the UMLS paths. The final experiments examined the alignment of different evaluation metrics, UMLS-based and non-UMLS, with human expert evaluation.</p></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><p>In probing the UMLS knowledge, GPT-3.5 significantly outperformed Llama2 and a simple baseline yielding an F1 score of 10.9% in completing one-hop UMLS paths for a given concept. Grounding diagnosis predictions with the UMLS paths improved the results for both models on both tasks, with the highest improvement (4%) in SapBERT score. There was a weak correlation between the widely used evaluation metrics (ROUGE and SapBERT) and human judgments.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion:</h3><p>We found that while popular LLMs contain some medical knowledge in their internal representations, augmentation with the UMLS knowledge provides performance gains around diagnosis generation. The UMLS needs to be tailored for the task to improve the LLMs predictions. Finding evaluation metrics that are aligned with human judgments better than the traditional ROUGE and BERT-based scores remains an open research question.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15263,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","volume":"157 ","pages":"Article 104707"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the role of the UMLS in supporting diagnosis generation proposed by Large Language Models\",\"authors\":\"Majid Afshar ,&nbsp;Yanjun Gao ,&nbsp;Deepak Gupta ,&nbsp;Emma Croxford ,&nbsp;Dina Demner-Fushman\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104707\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective:</h3><p>Traditional knowledge-based and machine learning diagnostic decision support systems have benefited from integrating the medical domain knowledge encoded in the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) to supplant traditional systems poses questions of the quality and extent of the medical knowledge in the models’ internal knowledge representations and the need for external knowledge sources. The objective of this study is three-fold: to probe the diagnosis-related medical knowledge of popular LLMs, to examine the benefit of providing the UMLS knowledge to LLMs (grounding the diagnosis predictions), and to evaluate the correlations between human judgments and the UMLS-based metrics for generations by LLMs.</p></div><div><h3>Methods:</h3><p>We evaluated diagnoses generated by LLMs from consumer health questions and daily care notes in the electronic health records using the ConsumerQA and Problem Summarization datasets. Probing LLMs for the UMLS knowledge was performed by prompting the LLM to complete the diagnosis-related UMLS knowledge paths. Grounding the predictions was examined in an approach that integrated the UMLS graph paths and clinical notes in prompting the LLMs. The results were compared to prompting without the UMLS paths. The final experiments examined the alignment of different evaluation metrics, UMLS-based and non-UMLS, with human expert evaluation.</p></div><div><h3>Results:</h3><p>In probing the UMLS knowledge, GPT-3.5 significantly outperformed Llama2 and a simple baseline yielding an F1 score of 10.9% in completing one-hop UMLS paths for a given concept. Grounding diagnosis predictions with the UMLS paths improved the results for both models on both tasks, with the highest improvement (4%) in SapBERT score. There was a weak correlation between the widely used evaluation metrics (ROUGE and SapBERT) and human judgments.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion:</h3><p>We found that while popular LLMs contain some medical knowledge in their internal representations, augmentation with the UMLS knowledge provides performance gains around diagnosis generation. The UMLS needs to be tailored for the task to improve the LLMs predictions. Finding evaluation metrics that are aligned with human judgments better than the traditional ROUGE and BERT-based scores remains an open research question.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Biomedical Informatics\",\"volume\":\"157 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104707\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Biomedical Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046424001254\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biomedical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532046424001254","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:传统的基于知识和机器学习的诊断决策支持系统得益于整合了统一医学语言系统(UMLS)中编码的医学领域知识。大型语言模型(LLM)的出现取代了传统系统,这就提出了模型内部知识表征中医学知识的质量和范围以及对外部知识源的需求等问题。本研究的目的有三:探究流行 LLM 的诊断相关医学知识;研究向 LLM 提供 UMLS 知识的益处(为诊断预测提供基础);评估人类判断与基于 UMLS 的 LLM 生成指标之间的相关性:我们使用消费者质量保证(ConsumerQA)和问题汇总(Problem Summarization)数据集,评估了 LLMs 根据消费者健康问题和电子健康记录中的日常护理记录生成的诊断。通过提示 LLM 完成与诊断相关的 UMLS 知识路径,对 LLM 的 UMLS 知识进行探测。在对 LLMs 进行提示时,采用了一种将 UMLS 图路径和临床笔记整合在一起的方法,对预测的基础进行了研究。实验结果与没有 UMLS 路径的提示进行了比较。最后的实验检验了不同评价指标(基于 UMLS 和非 UMLS)与人类专家评价的一致性:在探究 UMLS 知识方面,GPT-3.5 的表现明显优于 Llama2 和简单基线,在完成给定概念的一跳 UMLS 路径方面,GPT-3.5 的 F1 得分为 10.9%。以 UMLS 路径为基础的诊断预测提高了两个模型在两个任务中的结果,其中 SapBERT 分数的提高幅度最大(4%)。广泛使用的评价指标(ROUGE 和 SapBERT)与人类判断之间的相关性较弱:我们发现,虽然流行的 LLM 在其内部表示法中包含一些医学知识,但使用 UMLS 知识进行增强可提高诊断生成的性能。为了提高 LLMs 的预测能力,UMLS 需要针对任务进行定制。寻找比传统的基于 ROUGE 和 BERT 的分数更符合人类判断的评价指标,仍然是一个有待研究的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

On the role of the UMLS in supporting diagnosis generation proposed by Large Language Models

On the role of the UMLS in supporting diagnosis generation proposed by Large Language Models

Objective:

Traditional knowledge-based and machine learning diagnostic decision support systems have benefited from integrating the medical domain knowledge encoded in the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS). The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) to supplant traditional systems poses questions of the quality and extent of the medical knowledge in the models’ internal knowledge representations and the need for external knowledge sources. The objective of this study is three-fold: to probe the diagnosis-related medical knowledge of popular LLMs, to examine the benefit of providing the UMLS knowledge to LLMs (grounding the diagnosis predictions), and to evaluate the correlations between human judgments and the UMLS-based metrics for generations by LLMs.

Methods:

We evaluated diagnoses generated by LLMs from consumer health questions and daily care notes in the electronic health records using the ConsumerQA and Problem Summarization datasets. Probing LLMs for the UMLS knowledge was performed by prompting the LLM to complete the diagnosis-related UMLS knowledge paths. Grounding the predictions was examined in an approach that integrated the UMLS graph paths and clinical notes in prompting the LLMs. The results were compared to prompting without the UMLS paths. The final experiments examined the alignment of different evaluation metrics, UMLS-based and non-UMLS, with human expert evaluation.

Results:

In probing the UMLS knowledge, GPT-3.5 significantly outperformed Llama2 and a simple baseline yielding an F1 score of 10.9% in completing one-hop UMLS paths for a given concept. Grounding diagnosis predictions with the UMLS paths improved the results for both models on both tasks, with the highest improvement (4%) in SapBERT score. There was a weak correlation between the widely used evaluation metrics (ROUGE and SapBERT) and human judgments.

Conclusion:

We found that while popular LLMs contain some medical knowledge in their internal representations, augmentation with the UMLS knowledge provides performance gains around diagnosis generation. The UMLS needs to be tailored for the task to improve the LLMs predictions. Finding evaluation metrics that are aligned with human judgments better than the traditional ROUGE and BERT-based scores remains an open research question.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
Journal of Biomedical Informatics 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
243
审稿时长
32 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Biomedical Informatics reflects a commitment to high-quality original research papers, reviews, and commentaries in the area of biomedical informatics methodology. Although we publish articles motivated by applications in the biomedical sciences (for example, clinical medicine, health care, population health, and translational bioinformatics), the journal emphasizes reports of new methodologies and techniques that have general applicability and that form the basis for the evolving science of biomedical informatics. Articles on medical devices; evaluations of implemented systems (including clinical trials of information technologies); or papers that provide insight into a biological process, a specific disease, or treatment options would generally be more suitable for publication in other venues. Papers on applications of signal processing and image analysis are often more suitable for biomedical engineering journals or other informatics journals, although we do publish papers that emphasize the information management and knowledge representation/modeling issues that arise in the storage and use of biological signals and images. System descriptions are welcome if they illustrate and substantiate the underlying methodology that is the principal focus of the report and an effort is made to address the generalizability and/or range of application of that methodology. Note also that, given the international nature of JBI, papers that deal with specific languages other than English, or with country-specific health systems or approaches, are acceptable for JBI only if they offer generalizable lessons that are relevant to the broad JBI readership, regardless of their country, language, culture, or health system.
×
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