Cited by 41Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationTopic ModelingMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

Large language models leverage external knowledge to extend clinical insight beyond language boundaries

Open access
Wu, Jiageng, Wu, Xian, Qiu, Zhaopeng, Li, Minghui, Lin, Shixu, Zhang, Yingying, Zheng, Yefeng, Yuan, Changzheng +1 more·2024·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

Objectives: Large Language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT and Med-PaLM have excelled in various medical question-answering tasks. However, these English-centric models encounter challenges in non-English clinical settings, primarily due to limited clinical knowledge in respective languages, a consequence of imbalanced training corpora. We systematically evaluate LLMs in the Chinese medical context and develop a novel in-context learning framework to enhance their performance. Materials and Methods: The latest China National Medical Licensing Examination (CNMLE-2022) served as the benchmark. We collected 53 medical books and 381 149 medical questions to construct the medical knowledge base and question bank. The proposed Knowledge and Few-shot Enhancement In-context Learning (KFE) framework leverages the in-context learning ability of LLMs to integrate diverse external clinical knowledge sources. We evaluated KFE with ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), GPT-4, Baichuan2-7B, Baichuan2-13B, and QWEN-72B in CNMLE-2022 and further investigated the effectiveness of different pathways for incorporating LLMs with medical knowledge from 7 distinct perspectives. Results: Directly applying ChatGPT failed to qualify for the CNMLE-2022 at a score of 51. Cooperated with the KFE framework, the LLMs with varying sizes yielded consistent and significant improvements. The ChatGPT’s performance surged to 70.04 and GPT-4 achieved the highest score of 82.59. This surpasses the qualification threshold (60) and exceeds the average human score of 68.70, affirming the effectiveness and robustness of the framework. It also enabled a smaller Baichuan2-13B to pass the examination, showcasing the great potential in low-resource settings. Discussion and Conclusion: This study shed light on the optimal practices to enhance the capabilities of LLMs in non-English medical scenarios. By synergizing medical knowledge through in-context learning, LLMs can extend clinical insight beyond language barriers in healthcare, significantly reducing language-related disparities of LLM applications and ensuring global benefit in this field.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jamia/ocae079

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Advanced LLMs often rely on general domain datasets and lack exposure to real-world EHR notes, which limits their effectiveness in clinical settings.

    “Furthermore, due to data access and privacy concerns34, advanced LLMs often rely on general domain datasets and lack exposure to real-world EHR notes, which limits their effectiveness in clinical settings24,36.”

    From Probabilistic medical predictions of large language models (2024) · cites this paper as [24]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Radford A, Wu J, Child R, et al. Language models are unsuper- vised multitask learners. OpenAI Blog. 2019;1(8):9.
  2. Chung HW, Hou L, Longpre S, et al. Scaling instruction-finetuned language models. J Mach Learn Res. 2024;25(70):1-53.
  3. Brown T, Mann B, Ryder N, et al. Language models are few-shot learners. In: 34th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation, Inc. (NeurIPS); 2020:1877-1901.
  4. Wei J, Wang X, Schuurmans D, et al. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. In: 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. Neural Information Proc- essing Systems Foundation, Inc. (NeurIPS); 2022:24824-24837.
  5. Zhang X, Wu J, He Z, Liu X, Su Y. Medical exam question answering with large-scale reading comprehension. In: Proceed- ings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Thirtieth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Confer- ence and Eighth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'18). 2018:5706-5713.
  6. Zhang Z, Zhang A, Li M, Smola A. Automatic chain of thought prompting in large language models. In: The 11th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR). 2023. Accessed April 11, 2024. https://openreview.net/forum?id=5NTt8GFjUHkr
  7. Guu K, Lee K, Tung Z, Pasupat P, Chang M. Retrieval augmented language model pre-training. In: International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR; 2020:3929-3938.
  8. Wei J, Tay Y, Bommasani R, et al. Emergent abilities of large lan- guage models. In: Transactions on Machine Learning Research (TMLR). 2022. Accessed April 11, 2024. https://openreview.net/ forum?id=yzkSU5zdwD
  9. Singhal K, Azizi S, Tu T, et al. Large language models encode clini- cal knowledge. Nature. 2023;620(7972):172-180.
  10. Lehman E, Mahajan D, Wulff J, et al. Do we still need clinical lan- guage models? In: International Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning. PMLR; 2023:578-597.
  11. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2024, 31, 2054-2064 https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocae079 Research and Applications · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, J., Wu, X., Qiu, Z., Li, M., Lin, S., Zhang, Y., Zheng, Y., Yuan, C., & Yang, J.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Tencent (China) (CN)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
  • Wu, Xian
  • Yuan, Changzheng
  • Yang, Jie
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2024-04-29
Volume
31
Issue
9
Pages
2054-2064
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W4396498719
Cited by
41
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
large language models, in-context learning, medical knowledge base, few-shot learning, language barriers in healthcare, resource-limited settings, external knowledge integration, medical licensing examinations
MeSH terms
China, Humans, Language, Licensure, Medical, Natural Language Processing, Knowledge Bases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review