Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39442600›Full record

ArticleProgress in cardiovascular diseases

ChatGPT-4 extraction of heart failure symptoms and signs from electronic health records.

T Elizabeth Workman, Ali Ahmed, Helen M Sheriff, Venkatesh K Raman, Sijian Zhang, Yijun Shao, Charles Faselis, Gregg C Fonarow, Qing Zeng-Treitler

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Progress in cardiovascular diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

T Elizabeth WorkmanWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA. Electronic address: lizworkman@gwu.edu.
Ali AhmedWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA; Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA.
Helen M SheriffWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA.
Venkatesh K RamanWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA.
Sijian ZhangWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA.
Yijun ShaoWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA.
Charles FaselisWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA.
Gregg C FonarowUniversity of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Qing Zeng-TreitlerWashington DC VA Medical Center, Washington DC, USA; The George Washington University, Washington DC, USA.

Funding

HSRD VA I01 HX002422
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNatural language processing (NLP) can facilitate research utilizing data from electronic health records (EHRs). Large language models can potentially improve NLP applications leveraging EHR notes. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of zero-shot learning using Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer 4 (ChatGPT-4) for extraction of symptoms and signs, and compare its performance to baseline machine learning and rule-based methods developed using annotated data. METHODS AND

resultsFrom unstructured clinical notes of the national EHR data of the Veterans healthcare system, we extracted 1999 text snippets containing relevant keywords for heart failure symptoms and signs, which were then annotated by two clinicians. We also created 102 synthetic snippets that were semantically similar to snippets randomly selected from the original 1999 snippets. The authors applied zero-shot learning, using two different forms of prompt engineering in a symptom and sign extraction task with ChatGPT-4, utilizing the synthetic snippets. For comparison, baseline models using machine learning and rule-based methods were trained using the original 1999 annotated text snippets, and then used to classify the 102 synthetic snippets. The best zero-shot learning application achieved 90.6 % precision, 100 % recall, and 95 % F1 score, outperforming the best baseline method, which achieved 54.9 % precision, 82.4 % recall, and 65.5 % F1 score. Prompt style and temperature settings influenced zero-shot learning performance.

conclusionsZero-shot learning utilizing ChatGPT-4 significantly outperformed traditional machine learning and rule-based NLP. Prompt type and temperature settings affected zero-shot learning performance. These findings suggest a more efficient means of symptoms and signs extraction than traditional machine learning and rule-based methods.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsHeart FailureNatural Language ProcessingData MiningHumansMachine LearningPredictive Value of TestsSymptom AssessmentUnited StatesHeart failureInformation extractionLarge language modelsZero-shot learning

Identifiers

PMID39442600
PMCPMC12844218

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.