Reconstructing Sepsis Trajectories from Clinical Case Reports using LLMs: the Textual Time Series Corpus for Sepsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".