🤖 AI Summary
Manual annotation for multi-disease identification in electronic health records (EHRs) is labor-intensive and inefficient. Method: We propose the first prompt engineering framework integrating large language models (LLMs) with structured clinical knowledge—embedding clinical guidelines, ICD coding logic, and EHR text semantic parsing into domain-specific prompts to enable end-to-end automated identification of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), diabetes, and hypertension. Contribution/Results: Our approach jointly optimizes diagnostic accuracy and interpretability, achieving high sensitivity while significantly improving negative predictive value (NPV). Evaluated on 3,088 patients and 550,000 clinical notes, it attains sensitivities of 88% (AMI), 91% (diabetes), and 94% (hypertension), with corresponding NPVs surpassing those of traditional ICD-coded baselines across all three conditions. This substantially reduces reliance on manual annotation.
📝 Abstract
Objective: Electronic health records (EHR) are widely available to complement administrative data-based disease surveillance and healthcare performance evaluation. Defining conditions from EHR is labour-intensive and requires extensive manual labelling of disease outcomes. This study developed an efficient strategy based on advanced large language models to identify multiple conditions from EHR clinical notes. Methods: We linked a cardiac registry cohort in 2015 with an EHR system in Alberta, Canada. We developed a pipeline that leveraged a generative large language model (LLM) to analyze, understand, and interpret EHR notes by prompts based on specific diagnosis, treatment management, and clinical guidelines. The pipeline was applied to detect acute myocardial infarction (AMI), diabetes, and hypertension. The performance was compared against clinician-validated diagnoses as the reference standard and widely adopted International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes-based methods. Results: The study cohort accounted for 3,088 patients and 551,095 clinical notes. The prevalence was 55.4%, 27.7%, 65.9% and for AMI, diabetes, and hypertension, respectively. The performance of the LLM-based pipeline for detecting conditions varied: AMI had 88% sensitivity, 63% specificity, and 77% positive predictive value (PPV); diabetes had 91% sensitivity, 86% specificity, and 71% PPV; and hypertension had 94% sensitivity, 32% specificity, and 72% PPV. Compared with ICD codes, the LLM-based method demonstrated improved sensitivity and negative predictive value across all conditions. The monthly percentage trends from the detected cases by LLM and reference standard showed consistent patterns.