Large language models in biomedicine and health: current research landscape and future directions
Open accessAbstract
Large language models in biomedicine and health: current research landscape and future directionsLarge language models (LLMs) are a specialized type of generative artificial intelligence (AI) focused on generating natural language text.These models are developed through extensive training on massive amounts of text data and use deep learning algorithms to generate new text that closely resembles human-generated text.Generative AI methods, including LLMs, are rapidly transforming various domains, including biomedicine and healthcare.[1][2][3][4][5][6] They have already demonstrated remarkable potential as a means to process and analyze large amounts of text, interpret natural language, and generate new content in these domains.For example, Nori et al reported that GPT-4 is able to correctly answer the majority of questions from medical practice licensing exams, comfortably obtaining a passing grade.7 Similarly, Stribling et al found that this model exceeded the average performance of students in the graduate medical sciences on the majority of examinations, including strong performance on short answer and essay questions.8 Even though passing the exam is not the same as applying the knowledge in a real-world setting, these results demonstrate that LLMs can generate appropriate multiple-choice and narrative responses to questions framed in natural language.ChatGPT, first released in November 2022, has garnered phenomenal attention from both the scientific community and a broader society.A keyword search of "large language models" OR "ChatGPT" in PubMed returned over 4500 articles that discuss the technology and its implications for various topics, including medical informatics, by the end of June 2024.In addition, LLM-based technologies have already been deployed in several healthcare systems and are offered as integrated products for use in the clinic within vendor electronic health record systems (for thoughts on initial evaluations of an early product, see Garcia et al 9 and Tai-Seale et al 10 ).This rapid adoption of LLMs like ChatGPT brings an unprecedented opportunity to use this novel AI technology to transform healthcare and medicine.Despite their potential benefits, LLMs can sometimes produce invalid and unsubstantiated responses, a phenomenon known as the "hallucination and confabulation issue" in the literature, or biased responses, due to the biases inherent in their training data.[11][12][13][14][15][16][17] With this great potential also comes the need for trustworthy and responsible development and use of technology.As we continue to explore the capabilities of ChatGPT and other LLMs, it is critical to address related ethical, legal, and social issues to ensure that the technology is used in ways that are safe, fair, trustworthy, and beneficial for all.In the context of biomedicine and healthcare, it is particularly important to engage stakeholders, such as AI researchers, developers of data-driven clinical decision support, care providers, and system implementers from both academic medical centers and industry, to ensure responsible use of LLMs for good.To accelerate research and development in this area, we issued a call for submissions in Summer 2023, specifically focusing on the intersection of biomedicine/health and LLMs, and invited contributions on all related aspects.We invited submissions that report on innovative informatics methods development and evaluation, as well as studies that demonstrate the effectiveness/limitations of LLMs methodologies in healthcare.We particularly encouraged submissions that address the challenges and opportunities of this intersection and offer new insights into how these fields can work together to advance healthcare.This editorial provides an overview of the papers accepted in this Focus Issue.We highlight major themes and unique aspects of the research papers in medical LLMs, discuss ongoing challenges, and recommend future research directions.Box 1 lists the relevant large language model terms and abbreviations used in this editorial. Overall statistics of the Focus IssueThis JAMIA Focus Issue on LLMs in biomedicine and health has drawn enthusiasm from many researchers across different research disciplines.In total, we received over 150 submissions from authors in 25 countries and regions across 6 continents worldwide.The rigorous JAMIA peer review process was applied to all submissions, 41 of which were ultimately accepted for publication in the Focus Issue (Table 1).The majority of the accepted papers were authored by authors in North America, followed by those in Asia and Europe (Figure 1A).The Focus Issue highlights the nature of multi-disciplinary collaboration in medical informatics research across the broad JAMIA community.The number of authors per paper varies from 1 to 23, with an average of 7.3.Many papers feature authors with diverse expertise from different departments and organizations.The authors' expertise spans a wide range of fields,
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Existing reviews of LLMs in healthcare have largely neglected a deeper analysis of explainability methods.
“Existing reviews of LLMs in healthcare have largely neglected a deeper analysis of explainability methods.”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [49]
Cites
Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation
Ji, Z., Lee, N., Frieske, R., Yu, T., Su, D., Xu, Y., Ishii, E., Bang, Y. J., Madotto, A., & Fung, P. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3571730 · Cited by 5,025 · see citing works
Foundation models for generalist medical artificial intelligence
Moor, M., Banerjee, O., Abad, Z. S. H., Krumholz, H. M., Leskovec, J., Topol, E. J., & Rajpurkar, P. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05881-4 · Cited by 2,028 · see citing works
Detecting hallucinations in large language models using semantic entropy
Farquhar, S., Kossen, J., Kuhn, L., & Gal, Y. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07421-0 · Cited by 934 · see citing works
Opportunities and Challenges for ChatGPT and Large Language Models in Biomedicine and Health
Tian, S., Jin, Q., Yeganova, L., Lai, P.-T., Zhu, Q., Chen, X., Yang, Y., Chen, Q., Kim, W., Comeau, D. C., et al. (2023) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbad493 · Cited by 359 · see citing works
Self-citationHarnessing the potential of large language models in medical education: promise and pitfalls
Benítez, T. M., Xu, Y., Boudreau, J. D., Kow, A. W. C., Bello, F., Van Phuoc, L., Wang, X., Sun, X., Leung, G. K.-K., Lan, Y., et al. (2024) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocad252 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Reasoning with large language models for medical question answering
Lucas, M. M., Yang, J., Pomeroy, J. K., & Yang, C. C. (2024) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocae131 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Leveraging generative AI for clinical evidence synthesis needs to ensure trustworthiness
Zhang, G., Jin, Q., Jered McInerney, D., Chen, Y., Wang, F., Cole, C. L., Yang, Q., Wang, Y., Malin, B. A., Peleg, M., et al. (2024) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2024.104640 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Self-citationLeveraging large language models to foster equity in healthcare
Rodriguez, J. A., Alsentzer, E., & Bates, D. W. (2024) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocae055 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Mixed methods assessment of the influence of demographics on medical advice of ChatGPT
Andreadis, K., Newman, D. R., Twan, C., Shunk, A., Mann, D. M., & Stevens, E. R. (2024) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocae086 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Cassell, K., Ologunowa, A., Rastegar-Mojarad, M., Chun, B., Huang, Y.-L., Wang, D., & Cossrow, N. (2025) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2025.1662202 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Enhancing Medical Question Answering with LLMs via a Hybrid Retrieval-Augmented Generation Framework
Aljohani, B., & Alsanoosy, T. (2026) · Information · doi:10.3390/info17020133 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review
Mishra, N., Abu-Hanna, A., & Calixto, I. (2026) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2026.103501
- Authors
- Lu, Z., Peng, Y., Cohen, T., Ghassemi, M., Weng, C., & Tian, S.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
- University of Washington (US)
- MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
- Columbia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lu, Zhiyong
- Venue
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2024-08-22
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1801-1811
- ISSN
- 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-974X
- PMC
- PMC11339542
- OpenAlex
- W4401793114
- Cited by
- 92
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 46 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 8.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- public-domain
- Locations
- Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH
- Intramural Research Program
- National Library of Medicine (R01LM014306, R01LM014344, R01LM014056, R21LM013934)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- large language models, ChatGPT, medical education, training data bias, legal and ethical issues, responsible AI development, electronic health records, clinical decision support, natural language processing, medical informatics, clinical implementation of AI, trustworthiness
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Medical Informatics, Natural Language Processing, Biomedical Research
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