A Multi-Phase Analysis of Blood Culture Stewardship: Machine Learning Prediction, Expert Recommendation Assessment, and LLM Automation

Blood cultures are often over ordered without clear justification, straining healthcare resources and contributing to inappropriate antibiotic use pressures worsened by the global shortage. In study of 135483 emergency department (ED) blood culture orders, we developed machine learning (ML) models to predict the risk of bacteremia using structured electronic health record (EHR) data and provider notes via a large language model (LLM). The structured models AUC improved from 0.76 to 0.79 with note embeddings and reached 0.81 with added diagnosis codes. Compared to an expert recommendation framework applied by human reviewers and an LLM-based pipeline, our ML approach offered higher specificity without compromising sensitivity. The recommendation framework achieved sensitivity 86%, specificity 57%, while the LLM maintained high sensitivity (96%) but over classified negatives, reducing specificity (16%). These findings demonstrate that ML models integrating structured and unstructured data can outperform consensus recommendations, enhancing diagnostic stewardship beyond existing standards of care.

Optimizing Large Language Models for Detecting Symptoms of Comorbid Depression or Anxiety in Chronic Diseases: Insights from Patient Messages

Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of comorbid depression or anxiety, complicating their management. This study evaluated the performance of large language models (LLMs) in detecting these symptoms from secure patient messages. We applied multiple approaches, including engineered prompts, systemic persona, temperature adjustments, and zero-shot and few-shot learning, to identify the best-performing model and enhance performance. Three out of five LLMs demonstrated excellent performance (over 90% of F-1 and accuracy), with Llama 3.1 405B achieving 93% in both F-1 and accuracy using a zero-shot approach. While LLMs showed promise in binary classification and handling complex metrics like Patient Health Questionnaire-4, inconsistencies in challenging cases warrant further real-life assessment. The findings highlight the potential of LLMs to assist in timely screening and referrals, providing valuable empirical knowledge for real-world triage systems that could improve mental health care for patients with chronic diseases.

Antibiotic Resistance Microbiology Dataset (ARMD): A De-identified Resource for Studying Antimicrobial Resistance Using Electronic Health Records

The Antibiotic Resistance Microbiology Dataset (ARMD) is a de-identified resource derived from electronic health records (EHR) that facilitates research into antimicrobial resistance (AMR). ARMD encompasses data from adult patients, focusing on microbiological cultures, antibiotic susceptibilities, and associated clinical and demographic features. Key attributes include organism identification, susceptibility patterns for 55 antibiotics, implied susceptibility rules, and de-identified patient information. This dataset supports studies on antimicrobial stewardship, causal inference, and clinical decision-making. ARMD is designed to be reusable and interoperable, promoting collaboration and innovation in combating AMR. This paper describes the dataset's acquisition, structure, and utility while detailing its de-identification process.

VeriFact: Verifying Facts in LLM-Generated Clinical Text with Electronic Health Records

Methods to ensure factual accuracy of text generated by large language models (LLM) in clinical medicine are lacking. VeriFact is an artificial intelligence system that combines retrieval-augmented generation and LLM-as-a-Judge to verify whether LLM-generated text is factually supported by a patient's medical history based on their electronic health record (EHR). To evaluate this system, we introduce VeriFact-BHC, a new dataset that decomposes Brief Hospital Course narratives from discharge summaries into a set of simple statements with clinician annotations for whether each statement is supported by the patient's EHR clinical notes. Whereas highest agreement between clinicians was 88.5%, VeriFact achieves up to 92.7% agreement when compared to a denoised and adjudicated average human clinican ground truth, suggesting that VeriFact exceeds the average clinician's ability to fact-check text against a patient's medical record. VeriFact may accelerate the development of LLM-based EHR applications by removing current evaluation bottlenecks.