Extracting Multifaceted Characteristics of Patients With Chronic Disease Comorbidity: Framework Development Using Large Language Models
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Research on chronic multimorbidity has increasingly become a focal point with the aging of the population. Many studies in this area require detailed patient characteristic information. However, the current methods for extracting such information are complex, time-consuming, and prone to errors. The challenge of quickly and accurately extracting patient characteristics has become a common issue in the study of chronic disease comorbidities. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to establish a comprehensive framework for extracting demographic and disease characteristics of patients with multimorbidity. This framework leverages large language models (LLMs) to extract feature information from unstructured and semistructured electronic health records pertaining to these patients. We investigated the model's proficiency in extracting feature information across 7 dimensions: basic information, disease details, lifestyle habits, family medical history, symptom history, medication recommendations, and dietary advice. In addition, we demonstrated the strengths and limitations of this framework. METHODS: We used data sourced from a grassroots community health service center in China. We developed a multifaceted feature extraction framework tailored for patients with multimorbidity, which consists of several integral components: feasibility testing, preprocessing, the determination of feature extraction, prompt modeling based on LLMs, postprocessing, and midterm evaluation. Within this framework, 7 types of feature information were extracted as straightforward features, and three types of features were identified as intricate features. On the basis of the straightforward features, we calculated patients' age, BMI, and 12 disease risk factors. Rigorous manual verification experiments were conducted 100 times for straightforward features and 200 times for intricate features, followed by comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessments of the experimental outcomes. RESULTS: -score of 94.4% for the 3 intricate feature extractions. Our analysis of the results revealed that accurate information content extraction is a substantially advantage of this framework, whereas ensuring consistency in the format of extracted information remains one of its challenges. CONCLUSIONS: The framework incorporates electronic health record information from 1225 patients with multimorbidity, covering a diverse range of 41 chronic diseases, and can seamlessly accommodate the inclusion of additional diseases. This underscores its scalability and adaptability as a method for extracting patient-specific characteristics, effectively addressing the challenges associated with information extraction in the context of multidisease research. Research and medical policy personnel can extract feature information by setting corresponding goals based on the research objectives and directly using the LLM for zero-sample target feature extraction. This approach greatly improves research efficiency and reduces labor requirements; moreover, due to the framework's high accuracy, it can increase study reliability.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».