Abstract:Background: The availability of increasingly powerful large language models (LLMs) has attracted substantial interest in their potential for interpreting and generating human-like text for biomedical and clinical applications. However, there are often demands for high accuracy, concerns about balancing generalizability and domain-specificity, and questions about prompting robustness when considering the adoption of LLMs for specific use cases. There also is a lack of a framework or method to help choose which LLMs (or prompting strategies) should be adopted for specific biomedical or clinical tasks. Objective: To address the speculations on applying LLMs for biomedical applications, this study aims to 1) propose a framework to comprehensively evaluate and compare the performance of a range of LLMs and prompting techniques on a suite of biomedical natural language processing (NLP) tasks; 2) use the framework to benchmark several general- purpose LLMs and biomedical domain-specific LLMs. Methods: We evaluated and compared six general-purpose LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5-Turbo, Flan-T5-XXL, Llama-3-8B-Instruct, Yi-1.5-34B-Chat, and Zephyr-7B-Beta) and three healthcare-specific LLMs (Medicine-Llama3-8B, Meditron-7B, and MedLLaMA-13B) on a set of 13 datasets - referred to as the Biomedical Language Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark (BLURB) - covering six commonly needed medical natural language processing tasks: named entity recognition (NER); relation extraction (RE); population, interventions, comparators, and outcomes (PICO); sentence similarity (SS); document classification (Class.); and question-answering (QA). All models were evaluated without further training or fine-tuning. Model performance was assessed according to a range of prompting strategies (formalized as a systematic, reusable prompting framework) and relied on the standard, task-specific evaluation metrics defined by BLURB. Results: Across all tasks, GPT-4 outperformed other LLMs, achieving a score of 64.6 on the benchmark, though other models, such as Flan-T5-XXL and Llama-3-8B-Instruct, demonstrated competitive performance on multiple tasks. We found that general-purpose models achieved better overall scores than domain-specific models, sometimes by significant margins. We observed a substantial impact of strategically editing the prompt describing the task and a consistent improvement in performance when including examples semantically similar to the input text. Additionally, the most performant prompts for nearly half the models outperformed the previously reported best results for the PubMedQA dataset from the BLURB leaderboard. Conclusions: These results provide evidence of the potential LLMs may have for biomedical applications and highlight the importance of robust evaluation before adopting LLMs for any specific use cases. Notably, performant open-source LLMs such as Llama-3- 8B-Instruct and Flan-T5-XXL show promise for use cases where trustworthiness and data confidentiality are concerns, as these models can be hosted locally, offering better security, transparency, and explainability. Continuing to explore how these emerging technologies can be adapted for the healthcare setting, paired with human expertise, and enhanced through quality control measures will be important research to allow responsible innovation with LLMs in the biomedical area.

Comparison of Prompt Engineering and Fine-Tuning Strategies in Large Language Models in the Classification of Clinical Notes

Large Language Model in Medical Information Extraction from Titles and Abstracts with Prompt Engineering Strategies: A Comparative Study of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4

Improving Large Language Models for Clinical Named Entity Recognition via Prompt Engineering

Evaluation of Large Language Model Performance on the Biomedical Language Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark : Comparative Study

Evaluation of large language model performance on the Biomedical Language Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark

Are Large Language Models Ready for Healthcare? A Comparative Study on Clinical Language Understanding

Is larger always better? Evaluating and prompting large language models for non-generative medical tasks

Evaluation of ChatGPT Family of Models for Biomedical Reasoning and Classification

Large Language Models in Medical Term Classification and Unexpected Misalignment Between Response and Reasoning

Evaluating the use of large language models to provide clinical recommendations in the Emergency Department

Learning to Make Rare and Complex Diagnoses With Generative AI Assistance: Qualitative Study of Popular Large Language Models

Advanced Prompting As a Catalyst: Empowering Large Language Models in the Management of Gastrointestinal Cancers

Enhancing Medical Task Performance in GPT-4V: A Comprehensive Study on Prompt Engineering Strategies

How well it works: Benchmarking performance of GPT models on medical natural language processing tasks

Toward Large Language Models as a Therapeutic Tool: Comparing Prompting Techniques to Improve GPT-Delivered Problem-Solving Therapy

Evaluating the ChatGPT family of models for biomedical reasoning and classification

Intelligent Understanding of Large Language Models in Traditional Chinese Medicine Based on Prompt Engineering Framework

Evaluation of General Large Language Models in Contextually Assessing Semantic Concepts Extracted from Adult Critical Care Electronic Health Record Notes

Towards Evaluating and Building Versatile Large Language Models for Medicine

Fine-Tuning Large Language Models to Enhance Programmatic Assessment in Graduate Medical Education

ClinicalGPT: Large Language Models Finetuned with Diverse Medical Data and Comprehensive Evaluation