Abstract:Background: The ability of large language models (LLMs) to interpret and generate human-like text has been accompanied with speculation about their application in medicine and clinical research. There is limited data available to inform evidence-based decisions on the appropriateness for specific use cases. Methods: We evaluated and compared four general-purpose LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5-turbo, Flan-T5-XXL, and Zephyr-7B-Beta) and a healthcare-specific LLM (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; population, interventions, comparators, and outcomes (PICO); sentence similarity; document classification; and question-answering. All models were evaluated without modification. Model performance was assessed according to a range of prompting strategies (formalised 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, followed by Flan-T5-XXL and GPT-3.5- turbo, then Zephyr-7b-Beta and MedLLaMA-13B. The most performant prompts for GPT-4 and Flan-T5-XXL both outperformed the previously-reported best results for the PubMedQA task. The domain-specific MedLLaMA-13B achieved lower scores for most tasks except for question-answering tasks. 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 in the prompt. Conclusion: These results provide evidence of the potential LLMs may have for medical application and highlight the importance of robust evaluation before adopting LLMs for any specific use cases. 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 medical area.

Aligning Large Language Models for Clinical Tasks

Improving Clinical Expertise in Large Language Models Using Electronic Medical Records

Large language models encode clinical knowledge

Large Language Models Leverage External Knowledge to Extend Clinical Insight Beyond Language Boundaries

Integrating UMLS Knowledge into Large Language Models for Medical Question Answering

Reasoning with large language models for medical question answering

Large Language Models in Healthcare: A Comprehensive Benchmark

Towards Expert-Level Medical Question Answering with Large Language Models

Large Language Models Are Poor Clinical Decision-Makers: A Comprehensive Benchmark

Two-phase Framework Clinical Question-Answering; A case-study of Autocorrection for Guideline-concordance

RuleAlign: Making Large Language Models Better Physicians with Diagnostic Rule Alignment

MedLM: Exploring Language Models for Medical Question Answering Systems

Can LLMs Correct Physicians, Yet? Investigating Effective Interaction Methods in the Medical Domain

Do Large Language Models have Shared Weaknesses in Medical Question Answering?

Large Language Models as Agents in the Clinic

Large Language Model Prompting Techniques for Advancement in Clinical Medicine

Enhancing Healthcare through Large Language Models: A Study on Medical Question Answering

Can large language models reason about medical questions?

Evaluating large language model workflows in clinical decision support: referral, triage, and diagnosis

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

Towards Leveraging Large Language Models for Automated Medical Q&A Evaluation