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.

MEDIC: Towards a Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating LLMs in Clinical Applications

Large language models encode clinical knowledge

Towards Automatic Evaluation for LLMs' Clinical Capabilities: Metric, Data, and Algorithm

A Framework to Assess Clinical Safety and Hallucination Rates of LLMs for Medical Text Summarisation

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

An Automatic Evaluation Framework for Multi-turn Medical Consultations Capabilities of Large Language Models

Improving Clinical Expertise in Large Language Models Using Electronic Medical Records

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

Evaluating Enhanced LLMs for Precise Mental Health Diagnosis from Clinical Notes

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

Testing and Evaluation of Health Care Applications of Large Language Models: A Systematic Review

Towards Evaluating and Building Versatile Large Language Models for Medicine

Med42 -- Evaluating Fine-Tuning Strategies for Medical LLMs: Full-Parameter vs. Parameter-Efficient Approaches

CliBench: A Multifaceted and Multigranular Evaluation of Large Language Models for Clinical Decision Making

Guidelines For Rigorous Evaluation of Clinical LLMs For Conversational Reasoning

MultifacetEval: Multifaceted Evaluation to Probe LLMs in Mastering Medical Knowledge

Large Language Model-Driven Evaluation of Medical Records Using MedCheckLLM

Evaluating and Mitigating Limitations of Large Language Models in Clinical Decision Making

Large Language Model Prompting Techniques for Advancement in Clinical Medicine

CliMedBench: A Large-Scale Chinese Benchmark for Evaluating Medical Large Language Models in Clinical Scenarios

Evaluating large language models in medical applications: a survey