Adapted large language models can outperform medical experts in clinical text summarization.


Journal

Nature medicine
ISSN: 1546-170X
Titre abrégé: Nat Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9502015

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2024
Historique:
received: 23 10 2023
accepted: 02 02 2024
pubmed: 28 2 2024
medline: 28 2 2024
entrez: 27 2 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Analyzing vast textual data and summarizing key information from electronic health records imposes a substantial burden on how clinicians allocate their time. Although large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in natural language processing (NLP) tasks, their effectiveness on a diverse range of clinical summarization tasks remains unproven. Here we applied adaptation methods to eight LLMs, spanning four distinct clinical summarization tasks: radiology reports, patient questions, progress notes and doctor-patient dialogue. Quantitative assessments with syntactic, semantic and conceptual NLP metrics reveal trade-offs between models and adaptation methods. A clinical reader study with 10 physicians evaluated summary completeness, correctness and conciseness; in most cases, summaries from our best-adapted LLMs were deemed either equivalent (45%) or superior (36%) compared with summaries from medical experts. The ensuing safety analysis highlights challenges faced by both LLMs and medical experts, as we connect errors to potential medical harm and categorize types of fabricated information. Our research provides evidence of LLMs outperforming medical experts in clinical text summarization across multiple tasks. This suggests that integrating LLMs into clinical workflows could alleviate documentation burden, allowing clinicians to focus more on patient care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38413730
doi: 10.1038/s41591-024-02855-5
pii: 10.1038/s41591-024-02855-5
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1134-1142

Subventions

Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : P41 EB027060
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 AR079431
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 AR077604
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB002524
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 AR077604
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : R01 EB002524
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 AR079431
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIBIB NIH HHS
ID : P41 EB027060
Pays : United States

Commentaires et corrections

Type : UpdateOf

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc.

Références

Golob, J. F. Jr, Como, J. J. & Claridge, J. A. The painful truth: the documentation burden of a trauma surgeon. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg. 80, 742–747 (2016).
doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000986 pubmed: 26886003
Arndt, B. G. et al. Tethered to the EHR: primary care physician workload assessment using EHR event log data and time–motion observations. Ann. Fam. Med. 15, 419–426 (2017).
doi: 10.1370/afm.2121 pubmed: 28893811 pmcid: 5593724
Fleming, S. L. et al. MedAlign: a clinician-generated dataset for instruction following with electronic medical records. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.14089 (2023).
Yackel, T. R. & Embi, P. J. Unintended errors with EHR-based result management: a case series. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 17, 104–107 (2010).
doi: 10.1197/jamia.M3294 pubmed: 20064810 pmcid: 2995631
Bowman, S. Impact of electronic health record systems on information integrity: quality and safety implications. Perspect. Health Inf. Manag. 10, 1c (2013).
Gershanik, E. F., Lacson, R. & Khorasani, R. Critical finding capture in the impression section of radiology reports. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2011, 465–469 (2011).
Gesner, E., Gazarian, P. & Dykes, P. The burden and burnout in documenting patient care: an integrative literature review. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 21, 1194–1198 (2019).
Ratwani, R. M. et al. A usability and safety analysis of electronic health records: a multi-center study. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 25, 1197–1201 (2018).
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocy088 pubmed: 29982549 pmcid: 7646875
Ehrenfeld, J. M. & Wanderer, J. P. Technology as friend or foe? Do electronic health records increase burnout? Curr. Opin. Anaesthesiol. 31, 357–360 (2018).
doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000588 pubmed: 29474217
Sinsky, C. et al. Allocation of physician time in ambulatory practice: a time and motion study in 4 specialties. Ann. Intern. Med. 165, 753–760 (2016).
doi: 10.7326/M16-0961 pubmed: 27595430
Khamisa, N., Peltzer, K. & Oldenburg, B. Burnout in relation to specific contributing factors and health outcomes among nurses: a systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10, 2214–2240 (2013).
doi: 10.3390/ijerph10062214 pubmed: 23727902 pmcid: 3717733
Duffy, W. J., Kharasch, M. S. & Du, H. Point of care documentation impact on the nurse–patient interaction. Nurs. Adm. Q. 34, E1–E10 (2010).
doi: 10.1097/NAQ.0b013e3181c95ec4 pubmed: 20023554
Chang, C.-P., Lee, T.-T., Liu, C.-H. & Mills, M. E. Nurses’ experiences of an initial and reimplemented electronic health record use. Comput. Inform. Nurs. 34, 183–190 (2016).
doi: 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000222 pubmed: 26886680
Shanafelt, T. D. et al. Relationship between clerical burden and characteristics of the electronic environment with physician burnout and professional satisfaction. Mayo Clin. Proc. 91, 836–848 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2016.05.007 pubmed: 27313121
Robinson, K. E. & Kersey, J. A. Novel electronic health record (EHR) education intervention in large healthcare organization improves quality, efficiency, time, and impact on burnout. Medicine (Baltimore) 97, e12319 (2018).
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012319 pubmed: 30235684
Toussaint, W. et al. Design considerations for high impact, automated echocardiogram analysis. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2006.06292 (2020).
Brown, T. et al. Language models are few-shot learners. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/1457c0d6bfcb4967418bfb8ac142f64a-Paper.pdf (NeurIPS, 2020).
Zhao, W. X. et al. A survey of large language models. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.18223 (2023).
Bubeck, S. et al. Sparks of artificial general intelligence: early experiments with GPT-4. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.12712 (2023).
Liang, P. et al. Holistic evaluation of language models. Transact. Mach. Learn. Res. (in the press).
Zheng, L. et al. Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.05685 (2023).
Wornow, M. et al. The shaky foundations of large language models and foundation models for electronic health records. NPJ Digit. Med. 6, 135 (2023).
doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00879-8 pubmed: 37516790 pmcid: 10387101
Thirunavukarasu, A. J. et al. Large language models in medicine. Nat. Med. 29, 1930–1940 (2023).
doi: 10.1038/s41591-023-02448-8 pubmed: 37460753
Singhal, K. et al. Large language models encode clinical knowledge. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06291-2 (2023).
Tu, T. et al. Towards generalist biomedical AI. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.14334 (2023).
Toma, A. et al. Clinical Camel: an open-source expert-level medical language model with dialogue-based knowledge encoding. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.12031 (2023).
Van Veen, D. et al. RadAdapt: radiology report summarization via lightweight domain adaptation of large language models. In 22nd Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing and BioNLP Shared Tasks 449–460 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023).
Mathur, Y. et al. SummQA at MEDIQA-Chat 2023: in-context learning with GPT-4 for medical summarization. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.17384 (2023).
Saravia, E. Prompt engineering guide. https://github.com/dair-ai/Prompt-Engineering-Guide (2022).
Best practices for prompt engineering with OpenAI API. https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6654000-best-practices-for-prompt-engineering-with-openai-api (2023).
Chung, H. et al. Scaling instruction-finetuned language models. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.11416 (2022).
Tay, Y. et al. UL2: unifying language learning paradigms. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.05131 (2023).
Taori, R. et al. Stanford Alpaca: an instruction-following LLaMA model. https://github.com/tatsu-lab/stanford_alpaca (2023).
Han, T. et al. MedAlpaca—an open-source collection of medical conversational AI models and training data. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.08247 (2023).
The Vicuna Team. Vicuna: an open-source chatbot impressing GPT-4 with 90%* ChatGPT quality. https://lmsys.org/blog/2023-03-30-vicuna/ (2023).
Touvron, H. et al. Llama 2: open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.09288 (2023).
OpenAI. ChatGPT. https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt (2022).
OpenAI. GPT-4 technical report. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.08774 (2023).
Lampinen, A. K. et al. Can language models learn from explanations in context? In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2022 https://aclanthology.org/2022.findings-emnlp.38.pdf (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2022).
Dettmers, T., Pagnoni, A., Holtzman, A. & Zettlemoyer, L. QLoRA: efficient finetuning of quantized LLMs. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.14314 (2023).
Yim, W.W. et al. Aci-bench: a novel ambient clinical intelligence dataset for benchmarking automatic visit note generation. Sci. Data https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02487-3 (2023).
Papineni, K., Roukos, S., Ward, T. & Zhu, W.-J. Bleu: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proc. of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.3115/1073083.1073135 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2002).
Walsh, K. E. et al. Measuring harm in healthcare: optimizing adverse event review. Med. Care 55, 436–441 (2017).
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000000679 pubmed: 27906769 pmcid: 5352561
Zhang, T., Kishore, V., Wu, F., Weinberger, K. Q. & Artzi, Y. BERTScore: evaluating text generation with BERT. International Conference on Learning Representations. https://openreview.net/forum?id=SkeHuCVFDr (2020).
Strobelt, H. et al. Interactive and visual prompt engineering for ad-hoc task adaptation with large language models. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 29, 1146–1156 (2022).
pubmed: 36191099
Wang, J. et al. Prompt engineering for healthcare: methodologies and applications. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.14670 (2023).
Jozefowicz, R., Vinyals, O., Schuster, M., Shazeer, N. & Wu, Y. Exploring the limits of language modeling. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1602.02410 (2016).
Chang, Y. et al. A survey on evaluation of large language models. A CM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1145/3641289 (2023).
Poli, M. et al. Hyena hierarchy: towards larger convolutional language models. In Proceedings of the 40thInternational Conference on Machine Learning 202, 1164 (2023).
Ding, J. et al. LongNet: scaling transformers to 1,000,000,000 tokens. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.02486 (2023).
Lin, C.-Y. ROUGE: a package for automatic evaluation of summaries. In Text Summarization Branches Out 74–81 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2004).
Ma, C. et al. ImpressionGPT: an iterative optimizing framework for radiology report summarization with chatGPT. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.08448 (2023).
Wei, S. et al. Medical question summarization with entity-driven contrastive learning. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.07437 (2023).
Manakul, P. et al. CUED at ProbSum 2023: Hierarchical ensemble of summarization models. In The 22nd Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing and BioNLP Shared Tasks 516–523 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023).
Yu, F. et al. Evaluating progress in automatic chest x-ray radiology report generation. Patterns (N Y) 4, 100802 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.patter.2023.100802 pubmed: 37720336
Tang, L. et al. Evaluating large language models on medical evidence summarization. NPJ Digit. Med. 6, 158 (2023).
Johnson, A., Pollard, T. & Mark, R. MIMIC-III Clinical Database Demo (version 1.4). PhysioNet https://doi.org/10.13026/C2HM2Q (2019).
Omiye, J. A., Lester, J. C., Spichak, S., Rotemberg, V. & Daneshjou, R. Large language models propagate race-based medicine. NPJ Digit. Med. 6, 195 (2023).
doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00939-z pubmed: 37864012 pmcid: 10589311
Zack, T. et al. Assessing the potential of GPT-4 to perpetuate racial and gender biases in health care: a model evaluation study. Lancet Digit. Health 6, e12–e22 (2024).
doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00225-X pubmed: 38123252
Chen, M. X. et al. The best of both worlds: combining recent advances in neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P18-1008 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2018).
Shi, T., Keneshloo, Y., Ramakrishnan, N. & Reddy, C. K. Neural abstractive text summarization with sequence-to-sequence models. ACM Trans. Data Sci. https://doi.org/10.1145/3419106 (2021).
Raffel, C. et al. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 21, 5485–5551 (2020).
Longpre, S. et al. The Flan collection: designing data and methods for effective instruction tuning. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2301.13688 (2023).
Lehman, E. et al. Do we still need clinical language models? In Proceedings of Machine Learning Research 209, 578–597 (Conference on Health, Inference, and Learning, 2023).
Lim, Z. W. et al. Benchmarking large language models’ performances for myopia care: a comparative analysis of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4.0, and Google Bard. EBioMedicine 95, 104770 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2023.104770 pubmed: 37625267 pmcid: 10470220
Rosoł, M., Gąsior, J. S., Łaba, J., Korzeniewski, K. & Młyńczak, M. Evaluation of the performance of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on the Medical Final Examination. Preprint at medRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.06.04.23290939 (2023).
Brin, D. et al. Comparing ChatGPT and GPT-4 performance in USMLE soft skill assessments. Sci. Rep. 13, 16492 (2023).
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-43436-9 pubmed: 37779171 pmcid: 10543445
Deka, P. et al. Evidence extraction to validate medical claims in fake news detection. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20627-6_1 (Springer, 2022).
Nie, F., Chen, M., Zhang, Z. & Cheng, X. Improving few-shot performance of language models via nearest neighbor calibration. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.02216 (2022).
Hu, E. et al. LoRA: low-rank adaptation of large language models. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.09685 (2021).
Peng, A., Wu, M., Allard, J., Kilpatrick, L. & Heidel, S. GPT-3.5 Turbo fine-tuning and API updates https://openai.com/blog/gpt-3-5-turbo-fine-tuning-and-api-updates (2023).
Demner-Fushman, D. et al. Preparing a collection of radiology examinations for distribution and retrieval. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 23, 304–310 (2016).
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocv080 pubmed: 26133894
Johnson, A. et al. MIMIC-CXR, a de-identified publicly available database of chest radiographs with free-text reports. Sci. Data 6, 317 (2019).
Delbrouck, J.-B., Varma, M., Chambon, P. & Langlotz, C. Overview of the RadSum23 shared task on multi-modal and multi-anatomical radiology report summarization. In Proc. of the 22st Workshop on Biomedical Language Processing https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.bionlp-1.45 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023).
Demner-Fushman, D., Ananiadou, S. & Cohen, K. B. The 22nd Workshop on Biomedical Natural Language Processing and BioNLP Shared Tasks. https://aclanthology.org/2023.bionlp-1 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023).
Johnson, A. et al. Mimic-iv. https://physionet.org/content/mimiciv/1.0/ (2020).
Ben Abacha, A. & Demner-Fushman, D. On the summarization of consumer health questions. In Proc. of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P19-1215 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2019).
Chen, Z., Varma, M., Wan, X., Langlotz, C. & Delbrouck, J.-B. Toward expanding the scope of radiology report summarization to multiple anatomies and modalities. In Proc. of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.acl-short.41 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2023).
Gao, Y. et al. Overview of the problem list summarization (ProbSum) 2023 shared task on summarizing patients' active diagnoses and problems from electronic health record progress notes. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.bionlp-1.43 (2023).
Gao, Y., Miller, T., Afshar, M. & Dligach, D. BioNLP Workshop 2023 Shared Task 1A: Problem List Summarization (version 1.0.0). PhysioNet. https://doi.org/10.13026/1z6g-ex18 (2023).
Goldberger, A. L. et al. PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals. Circulation 101, e215–e220 (2000).
Abacha, A. B., Yim, W.-W., Adams, G., Snider, N. & Yetisgen-Yildiz, M. Overview of the MEDIQA-Chat 2023 shared tasks on the summarization & generation of doctor–patient conversations. In Proc. of the 5th Clinical Natural Language Processing Workshop https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.clinicalnlp-1.52 (2023).
Yim, W., Ben Abacha, A., Snider, N., Adams, G. & Yetisgen, M. Overview of the MEDIQA-Sum task at ImageCLEF 2023: summarization and classification of doctor–patient conversations. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3497/paper-109.pdf (2023).
Mangrulkar, S., Gugger, S., Debut, L., Belkada, Y. & Paul, S. PEFT: state-of-the-art parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods https://github.com/huggingface/peft (2022).
Frantar, E., Ashkboos, S., Hoefler, T. & Alistarh, D. GPTQ: accurate post-training quantization for generative pre-trained transformers. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.17323 (2022).
Loshchilov, I. & Hutter, F. Decoupled weight decay regularization. In International Conference on Learning Representations https://openreview.net/forum?id=Bkg6RiCqY7 (2019)
Wolf, T. et al. Transformers: state-of-the-art natural language processing. In Proc. of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-demos.6 (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2020).
Soldaini, L. & Goharian, N. QuickUMLS: a fast, unsupervised approach for medical concept extraction. https://ir.cs.georgetown.edu/downloads/quickumls.pdf (2016).
Okazaki, N. & Tsujii, J. Simple and efficient algorithm for approximate dictionary matching. In Proc. of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics https://aclanthology.org/C10-1096.pdf (Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010).
Koo, T. K. & Li, M. Y. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J. Chiropr. Med. 15, 155–163 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 pubmed: 27330520 pmcid: 4913118
Vallat, R. Pingouin: statistics in Python. J. Open Source Softw. 3, 1026 (2018).
doi: 10.21105/joss.01026

Auteurs

Dave Van Veen (D)

Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. vanveen@stanford.edu.
Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA. vanveen@stanford.edu.

Cara Van Uden (C)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Louis Blankemeier (L)

Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.

Jean-Benoit Delbrouck (JB)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.

Asad Aali (A)

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.

Christian Bluethgen (C)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Anuj Pareek (A)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Malgorzata Polacin (M)

Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Eduardo Pontes Reis (EP)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Albert Einstein Israelite Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil.

Anna Seehofnerová (A)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Nidhi Rohatgi (N)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Poonam Hosamani (P)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

William Collins (W)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Neera Ahuja (N)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Curtis P Langlotz (CP)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Jason Hom (J)

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Sergios Gatidis (S)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

John Pauly (J)

Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Akshay S Chaudhari (AS)

Stanford Center for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Stanford Cardiovascular Institute, Stanford, CA, USA.

Classifications MeSH