MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415474980 · doi:10.1681/asn.2025feyefqjk

Assessing Open-Weight, Large Language Model for Symptom Extraction from Dialysis Notes: A Cost-Effective and Privacy-Preserving Approach

2025· article· en· W4415474980 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Baroz, Maria Carolina Festa, Rita S. Suri, Thomas A. Mavrakanas, William Beaubien‐Souligny

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialysisKidney diseaseHemodialysisMEDLINEData extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hemodialysis often leads to intradialytic symptoms that affect quality of life. Traditional methods to study these rely on patient questionnaires or free-text dialysis notes, which are associated with cost and quality challenges. This project evaluates open-source large language models (LLMs) that can run offline, aiming to extract symptoms from nursing notes while maintaining data privacy. Methods: We designed 36 information extraction agents by combining four open-source LLMs with distinct prompting approaches, such as in-context learning, chain-of-thought, and rule-based guidance. Each agent identified the presence of four target symptoms across 100 dialysis nursing notes. Outputs were compared to expert annotations performed independently and without knowledge of the agents’ results. Evaluation metrics included accuracy, recall, precision, specificity, and balanced F1 score. Results: Among 100 nursing notes, chest pain was noted twice, dyspnea 14 times, dizziness 23 times, and nausea 16 times. The best-performing agent, based on Mixtral 8x7B paired with a simple prompt, achieved 93% specificity, 71% sensitivity, 63% precision. Performance remained strong across most symptoms except for nausea, and generally decreased with smaller models or more elaborate prompting strategies (Figure). Conclusion: This study provides the first assessment of open-source LLMs operating offline on consumer-level hardware for extracting symptoms from dialysis notes. It offers an accessible, low-cost method to support research into the quality of life of dialysis patients. Funding: Government Support – Non-U.S.Performance of the top 6 agents. All agents use Mixtral-8x7B-instruct-v0.1 with various prompting strategies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207