Showing 1–3 of 3 results for author: Idnay, B

EvidenceOutcomes: a Dataset of Clinical Trial Publications with Clinically Meaningful Outcomes

Authors: Yiliang Zhou, Abigail M. Newbury, Gongbo Zhang, Betina Ross Idnay, Hao Liu, Chunhua Weng, Yifan Peng

Abstract: The fundamental process of evidence extraction and synthesis in evidence-based medicine involves extracting PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) elements from biomedical literature. However, Outcomes, being the most complex elements, are often neglected or oversimplified in existing benchmarks. To address this issue, we present EvidenceOutcomes, a novel, large, annotated corpus… ▽ More The fundamental process of evidence extraction and synthesis in evidence-based medicine involves extracting PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome) elements from biomedical literature. However, Outcomes, being the most complex elements, are often neglected or oversimplified in existing benchmarks. To address this issue, we present EvidenceOutcomes, a novel, large, annotated corpus of clinically meaningful outcomes extracted from biomedical literature. We first developed a robust annotation guideline for extracting clinically meaningful outcomes from text through iteration and discussion with clinicians and Natural Language Processing experts. Then, three independent annotators annotated the Results and Conclusions sections of a randomly selected sample of 500 PubMed abstracts and 140 PubMed abstracts from the existing EBM-NLP corpus. This resulted in EvidenceOutcomes with high-quality annotations of an inter-rater agreement of 0.76. Additionally, our fine-tuned PubMedBERT model, applied to these 500 PubMed abstracts, achieved an F1-score of 0.69 at the entity level and 0.76 at the token level on the subset of 140 PubMed abstracts from the EBM-NLP corpus. EvidenceOutcomes can serve as a shared benchmark to develop and test future machine learning algorithms to extract clinically meaningful outcomes from biomedical abstracts. △ Less

Submitted 2 June, 2025; originally announced June 2025.

Environment Scan of Generative AI Infrastructure for Clinical and Translational Science

Authors: Betina Idnay, Zihan Xu, William G. Adams, Mohammad Adibuzzaman, Nicholas R. Anderson, Neil Bahroos, Douglas S. Bell, Cody Bumgardner, Thomas Campion, Mario Castro, James J. Cimino, I. Glenn Cohen, David Dorr, Peter L Elkin, Jungwei W. Fan, Todd Ferris, David J. Foran, David Hanauer, Mike Hogarth, Kun Huang, Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer, Manoj Kandpal, Niranjan S. Karnik, Avnish Katoch, Albert M. Lai , et al. (32 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: This study reports a comprehensive environmental scan of the generative AI (GenAI) infrastructure in the national network for clinical and translational science across 36 institutions supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program led by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at the United States. With t… ▽ More This study reports a comprehensive environmental scan of the generative AI (GenAI) infrastructure in the national network for clinical and translational science across 36 institutions supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program led by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at the United States. With the rapid advancement of GenAI technologies, including large language models (LLMs), healthcare institutions face unprecedented opportunities and challenges. This research explores the current status of GenAI integration, focusing on stakeholder roles, governance structures, and ethical considerations by administering a survey among leaders of health institutions (i.e., representing academic medical centers and health systems) to assess the institutional readiness and approach towards GenAI adoption. Key findings indicate a diverse range of institutional strategies, with most organizations in the experimental phase of GenAI deployment. The study highlights significant variations in governance models, with a strong preference for centralized decision-making but notable gaps in workforce training and ethical oversight. Moreover, the results underscore the need for a more coordinated approach to GenAI governance, emphasizing collaboration among senior leaders, clinicians, information technology staff, and researchers. Our analysis also reveals concerns regarding GenAI bias, data security, and stakeholder trust, which must be addressed to ensure the ethical and effective implementation of GenAI technologies. This study offers valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities of GenAI integration in healthcare, providing a roadmap for institutions aiming to leverage GenAI for improved quality of care and operational efficiency. △ Less

Submitted 27 September, 2024; originally announced October 2024.

Closing the gap between open-source and commercial large language models for medical evidence summarization

Authors: Gongbo Zhang, Qiao Jin, Yiliang Zhou, Song Wang, Betina R. Idnay, Yiming Luo, Elizabeth Park, Jordan G. Nestor, Matthew E. Spotnitz, Ali Soroush, Thomas Campion, Zhiyong Lu, Chunhua Weng, Yifan Peng

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise in summarizing medical evidence. Most recent studies focus on the application of proprietary LLMs. Using proprietary LLMs introduces multiple risk factors, including a lack of transparency and vendor dependency. While open-source LLMs allow better transparency and customization, their performance falls short compared to proprietary ones. In this stud… ▽ More Large language models (LLMs) hold great promise in summarizing medical evidence. Most recent studies focus on the application of proprietary LLMs. Using proprietary LLMs introduces multiple risk factors, including a lack of transparency and vendor dependency. While open-source LLMs allow better transparency and customization, their performance falls short compared to proprietary ones. In this study, we investigated to what extent fine-tuning open-source LLMs can further improve their performance in summarizing medical evidence. Utilizing a benchmark dataset, MedReview, consisting of 8,161 pairs of systematic reviews and summaries, we fine-tuned three broadly-used, open-sourced LLMs, namely PRIMERA, LongT5, and Llama-2. Overall, the fine-tuned LLMs obtained an increase of 9.89 in ROUGE-L (95% confidence interval: 8.94-10.81), 13.21 in METEOR score (95% confidence interval: 12.05-14.37), and 15.82 in CHRF score (95% confidence interval: 13.89-16.44). The performance of fine-tuned LongT5 is close to GPT-3.5 with zero-shot settings. Furthermore, smaller fine-tuned models sometimes even demonstrated superior performance compared to larger zero-shot models. The above trends of improvement were also manifested in both human and GPT4-simulated evaluations. Our results can be applied to guide model selection for tasks demanding particular domain knowledge, such as medical evidence summarization. △ Less

Submitted 25 July, 2024; originally announced August 2024.