Evaluating the accuracy of a state-of-the-art large language model for prediction of admissions from the emergency room.
BERT
GPT-4
admission prediction
clinical informatics
emergency department
health informatics
large language models (LLMs)
machine learning (ML)
predictive modeling
retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)
transformers
Journal
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
ISSN: 1527-974X
Titre abrégé: J Am Med Inform Assoc
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9430800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 May 2024
21 May 2024
Historique:
received:
29
11
2023
accepted:
22
04
2024
medline:
21
5
2024
pubmed:
21
5
2024
entrez:
21
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) can play a critical role in emergency room operations by augmenting decision-making about patient admission. However, there are no studies for LLMs using real-world data and scenarios, in comparison to and being informed by traditional supervised machine learning (ML) models. We evaluated the performance of GPT-4 for predicting patient admissions from emergency department (ED) visits. We compared performance to traditional ML models both naively and when informed by few-shot examples and/or numerical probabilities. We conducted a retrospective study using electronic health records across 7 NYC hospitals. We trained Bio-Clinical-BERT and XGBoost (XGB) models on unstructured and structured data, respectively, and created an ensemble model reflecting ML performance. We then assessed GPT-4 capabilities in many scenarios: through Zero-shot, Few-shot with and without retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and with and without ML numerical probabilities. The Ensemble ML model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.88, an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.72 and an accuracy of 82.9%. The naïve GPT-4's performance (0.79 AUC, 0.48 AUPRC, and 77.5% accuracy) showed substantial improvement when given limited, relevant data to learn from (ie, RAG) and underlying ML probabilities (0.87 AUC, 0.71 AUPRC, and 83.1% accuracy). Interestingly, RAG alone boosted performance to near peak levels (0.82 AUC, 0.56 AUPRC, and 81.3% accuracy). The naïve LLM had limited performance but showed significant improvement in predicting ED admissions when supplemented with real-world examples to learn from, particularly through RAG, and/or numerical probabilities from traditional ML models. Its peak performance, although slightly lower than the pure ML model, is noteworthy given its potential for providing reasoning behind predictions. Further refinement of LLMs with real-world data is necessary for successful integration as decision-support tools in care settings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) can play a critical role in emergency room operations by augmenting decision-making about patient admission. However, there are no studies for LLMs using real-world data and scenarios, in comparison to and being informed by traditional supervised machine learning (ML) models. We evaluated the performance of GPT-4 for predicting patient admissions from emergency department (ED) visits. We compared performance to traditional ML models both naively and when informed by few-shot examples and/or numerical probabilities.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective study using electronic health records across 7 NYC hospitals. We trained Bio-Clinical-BERT and XGBoost (XGB) models on unstructured and structured data, respectively, and created an ensemble model reflecting ML performance. We then assessed GPT-4 capabilities in many scenarios: through Zero-shot, Few-shot with and without retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and with and without ML numerical probabilities.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The Ensemble ML model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.88, an area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.72 and an accuracy of 82.9%. The naïve GPT-4's performance (0.79 AUC, 0.48 AUPRC, and 77.5% accuracy) showed substantial improvement when given limited, relevant data to learn from (ie, RAG) and underlying ML probabilities (0.87 AUC, 0.71 AUPRC, and 83.1% accuracy). Interestingly, RAG alone boosted performance to near peak levels (0.82 AUC, 0.56 AUPRC, and 81.3% accuracy).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The naïve LLM had limited performance but showed significant improvement in predicting ED admissions when supplemented with real-world examples to learn from, particularly through RAG, and/or numerical probabilities from traditional ML models. Its peak performance, although slightly lower than the pure ML model, is noteworthy given its potential for providing reasoning behind predictions. Further refinement of LLMs with real-world data is necessary for successful integration as decision-support tools in care settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38771093
pii: 7676138
doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocae103
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : National Heart Lung and Blood Institute
ID : 5R01HL141841-05
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.