Medical Diagnosis Coding Automation: Similarity Search vs. Generative AI
klotzman, v.
Show abstract
ObjectiveThis study aims to predict ICD-10-CM codes for medical diagnoses from short diagnosis descriptions and compare two distinct approaches: similarity search and using a generative model with few-shot learning. Materials and MethodsThe text-embedding-ada-002 model was used to embed textual descriptions of 2023 ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes, provided by the Centers provided for Medicare & Medicaid Services. GPT-4 used few-shot learning. Both models underwent performance testing on 666 data points from the eICU Collaborative Research Database. ResultsThe text-embedding-ada-002 model successfully identified the relevant code from a set of similar codes 80% of the time, while GPT-4 achieved a 50 % accuracy in predicting the correct code. DiscussionThe work implies that text-embedding-ada-002 could automate medical coding better than GPT-4, highlighting potential limitations of generative language models for complicated tasks like this. ConclusionThe research shows that text-embedding-ada-002 outperforms GPT-4 in medical coding, highlighting embedding models usefulness in the domain of medical coding.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- LCD Benchmark: Long Clinical Document Benchmark on Mortality Prediction for Language Models 97%
- Annotation-preserving machine translation of English corpora to validate Dutch clinical concept extraction tools 95%
- Automated stratification of trauma injury severity across multiple body regions using multi-modal, multi-class machine learning models 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Natural Language Processing for Automated Annotation of Medication Mentions in Primary Care Visit Conversations 96%
- A Study of Calibration as a Measurement of Trustworthiness of Large Language Models in Biomedical Research 95%
- Comparative Effectiveness of Medical Concept Embedding for Feature Engineering in Phenotyping 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.