Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examination of large language models achieved an average recall of 0.87 for symptom extraction, indicating strong performance.
In this study, we examined how well the open-source foundational large language models (LLMs) can extract symptoms and signs (S&S), along with their corresponding ICD-10 codes, from clinical notes found in the public MTSamples dataset. The dataset comprising notes of patients with genitourinary conditions was manually annotated to compare the S&S extraction results with outputs generated by LLMs. We assessed three versions of the Llama model—Llama 3.1-13B, Llama 3.3-70B, and Me-Llama-13B—focusing on their consistency, runtime, and performance. Each model was tested on two tasks: (1) S&S extraction and (2) ICD-10 code generation. Our findings indicate that Llama 3.3-70B performed the best overall. With fast runtime and high consistency, it achieved an average recall of 0.87 and an average precision of 0.71 for S&S extraction, as well as an average recall of 0.71 and an average precision of 0.54 for ICD-10 code generation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bai et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: