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.

Optimal strategies for adapting open-source large language models for clinical information extraction: a benchmarking study in the context of ulcerative colitis research

A Comparative Study of Open-Source Large Language Models, GPT-4 and Claude 2: Multiple-Choice Test Taking in Nephrology

Distilling large language models for matching patients to clinical trials

Adapting Open-Source Large Language Models for Cost-Effective, Expert-Level Clinical Note Generation with On-Policy Reinforcement Learning

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

Can Open-Source LLMs Compete with Commercial Models? Exploring the Few-Shot Performance of Current GPT Models in Biomedical Tasks

OpenMedLM: Prompt engineering can out-perform fine-tuning in medical question-answering with open-source large language models

Is Open-Source There Yet? A Comparative Study on Commercial and Open-Source LLMs in Their Ability to Label Chest X-Ray Reports

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

Closing the gap between open-source and commercial large language models for medical evidence summarization

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

Automated Extraction of Patient-Centered Outcomes After Breast Cancer Treatment: An Open-Source Large Language Model-Based Toolkit

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

Evaluating and Enhancing Large Language Models' Performance in Domain-Specific Medicine: Development and Usability Study With DocOA

Evaluating and Enhancing Large Language Models'Performancein Domain-Specific Medicine:Development and Usability StudyWith DocOA

Customizing GPT-4 for clinical information retrieval from standard operating procedures

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

Comparative Analysis of Open-Source Language Models in Summarizing Medical Text Data

Optimizing large language models in digestive disease: strategies and challenges to improve clinical outcomes