MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6979281260

Reconstructing Sepsis Trajectories from Clinical Case Reports using LLMs: the Textual Time Series Corpus for Sepsis

2025· article· en· W6979281260 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. National Library of MedicineNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNHLBI Division of Intramural ResearchOak Ridge Institute for Science and EducationNational Institutes of HealthOak Ridge Associated UniversitiesCarnegie Mellon UniversityU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTimelineAutomatic summarizationPipeline (software)SepsisSeries (stratigraphy)Construct (python library)Time series
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical case reports and discharge summaries may be the most complete and accurate summarization of patient encounters, yet they are finalized, i.e., timestamped after the encounter. Complementary structured data streams become available sooner but suffer from incompleteness. To train models and algorithms on more complete and temporally fine-grained data, we construct a pipeline to phenotype, extract, and annotate time-localized findings within case reports using large language models. We apply our pipeline to generate an open-access textual time series corpus for Sepsis-3 comprising 2,139 case reports from the PubMed-Open Access (PMOA) Subset. To validate our system, we apply it to PMOA and timeline annotations from i2b2/MIMIC-IV and compare the results to physician-expert annotations. We show high recovery rates of clinical findings (event match rates: GPT-5--0.93, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct--0.76) and strong temporal ordering (concordance: GPT-5--0.965, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct--0.908). Our work characterizes the ability of LLMs to time-localize clinical findings in text, illustrating the limitations of LLM use for temporal reconstruction and providing several potential avenues of improvement via multimodal integration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueArXiv.orgSame topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207