Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Interpretable Medical Diagnostics with Structured Data Extraction by Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2306.05052 v1 pith:HHMBAQWP submitted 2023-06-08 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CL
keywords datamodelsmedicaltabularinterpretablellmsreasoningtemed-llm
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Tabular data is often hidden in text, particularly in medical diagnostic reports. Traditional machine learning (ML) models designed to work with tabular data, cannot effectively process information in such form. On the other hand, large language models (LLMs) which excel at textual tasks, are probably not the best tool for modeling tabular data. Therefore, we propose a novel, simple, and effective methodology for extracting structured tabular data from textual medical reports, called TEMED-LLM. Drawing upon the reasoning capabilities of LLMs, TEMED-LLM goes beyond traditional extraction techniques, accurately inferring tabular features, even when their names are not explicitly mentioned in the text. This is achieved by combining domain-specific reasoning guidelines with a proposed data validation and reasoning correction feedback loop. By applying interpretable ML models such as decision trees and logistic regression over the extracted and validated data, we obtain end-to-end interpretable predictions. We demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms state-of-the-art text classification models in medical diagnostics. Given its predictive performance, simplicity, and interpretability, TEMED-LLM underscores the potential of leveraging LLMs to improve the performance and trustworthiness of ML models in medical applications.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. RelationalFactQA: A Benchmark for Evaluating Tabular Fact Retrieval from Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RelationalFactQA shows that LLMs are much worse at retrieving facts as multi-record tables than as single answers, with the best model reaching only 24.7% tuple similarity.

Pith tools