Large Language Model Empowered Privacy-Protected Framework for PHI Annotation in Clinical Notes

The de-identification of private information in medical data is a crucial process to mitigate the risk of confidentiality breaches, particularly when patient personal details are not adequately removed before the release of medical records. Although rule-based and learning-based methods have been proposed, they often struggle with limited generalizability and require substantial amounts of annotated data for effective performance. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have shown significant promise in addressing these issues due to their superior language comprehension capabilities. However, LLMs present challenges, including potential privacy risks when using commercial LLM APIs and high computational costs for deploying open-source LLMs locally. In this work, we introduce LPPA, an LLM-empowered Privacy-Protected PHI Annotation framework for clinical notes, targeting the English language. By fine-tuning LLMs locally with synthetic notes, LPPA ensures strong privacy protection and high PHI annotation accuracy. Extensive experiments demonstrate LPPA's effectiveness in accurately de-identifying private information, offering a scalable and efficient solution for enhancing patient privacy protection.

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

The field of healthcare has increasingly turned its focus towards Large Language Models (LLMs) due to their remarkable performance. However, their performance in actual clinical applications has been underexplored. Traditional evaluations based on question-answering tasks don't fully capture the nuanced contexts. This gap highlights the need for more in-depth and practical assessments of LLMs in real-world healthcare settings. Objective: We sought to evaluate the performance of LLMs in the complex clinical context of adult critical care medicine using systematic and comprehensible analytic methods, including clinician annotation and adjudication. Methods: We investigated the performance of three general LLMs in understanding and processing real-world clinical notes. Concepts from 150 clinical notes were identified by MetaMap and then labeled by 9 clinicians. Each LLM's proficiency was evaluated by identifying the temporality and negation of these concepts using different prompts for an in-depth analysis. Results: GPT-4 showed overall superior performance compared to other LLMs. In contrast, both GPT-3.5 and text-davinci-003 exhibit enhanced performance when the appropriate prompting strategies are employed. The GPT family models have demonstrated considerable efficiency, evidenced by their cost-effectiveness and time-saving capabilities. Conclusion: A comprehensive qualitative performance evaluation framework for LLMs is developed and operationalized. This framework goes beyond singular performance aspects. With expert annotations, this methodology not only validates LLMs' capabilities in processing complex medical data but also establishes a benchmark for future LLM evaluations across specialized domains.