Automated Evaluation of Antibiotic Prescribing Guideline Concordance in Pediatric Sinusitis Clinical Notes
Weissenbacher, D.; Dutcher, L.; Boustany, M.; Cressman, L.; OCOnnor, K.; Hamilton, K. W.; Gerber, J.; Grundmeier, R.; Gonzalez-Hernandez, G.
Show abstract
BackgroundEnsuring antibiotics are prescribed only when necessary is crucial for maintaining their effectiveness and is a key focus of public health initiatives worldwide. In cases of sinusitis, among the most common reasons for antibiotic prescriptions in children, health-care providers must distinguish between bacterial and viral causes based on clinical signs and symptoms. However, due to the overlap between symptoms of acute sinusitis and viral upper respiratory infections, antibiotics are often over-prescribed. ObjectivesCurrently, there are no electronic health record (EHR)-based methods, such as lab tests or ICD-10 codes, to retroactively assess the appropriateness of these prescriptions, making manual chart reviews the only available method for evaluation, which is time-intensive and not feasible at a large scale. In this study, we propose using natural language processing to automate this assessment. MethodsWe developed, trained, and evaluated generative models to classify the appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions in 300 clinical notes from pediatric patients with sinusitis seen at a primary care practice in the Childrens Hospital of Philadelphia network. We utilized standard prompt engineering techniques, including few-shot learning and chain-of-thought prompting, to refine an initial prompt. Additionally, we employed Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning to train a medium-sized generative model Llama 3 70B-instruct. ResultsWhile parameter-efficient fine-tuning did not enhance performance, the combination of few-shot learning and chain-of-thought prompting proved beneficial. Our best results were achieved using the largest generative model publicly available to date, the Llama 3.1 405B-instruct. On our test set, the model correctly identified 91.4% of the 35 notes where antibiotic prescription was appropriate and 71.4% of the 14 notes where it was not appropriate. However, notes that were insufficiently, vaguely, or ambiguously documented by physicians posed a challenge to our model, as none evaluation sets were accurately classified. ConclusionOur generative model demonstrated strong performance in the challenging task of chart review. This level of performance may be sufficient for deploying the model within the EHR, where it can assist physicians in real-time to prescribe antibiotics in concordance with the guidelines, or for monitoring antibiotic stewardship on a large scale.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Modular Clinical Decision Support Networks (MoDN)—Updatable, Interpretable, and Portable Predictions for Evolving Clinical Environments 94%
- Natural language processing to evaluate texting conversations between patients and healthcare providers during COVID-19 Home-Based Care in Rwanda at scale 94%
- Evaluating Knowledge Fusion Models on Detecting Adverse Drug Events in Text 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Framework to Assess Clinical Safety and Hallucination Rates of LLMs for Medical Text Summarisation 95%
- Evaluating large language model workflows in clinical decision support: referral, triage, and diagnosis 95%
- Clinical Knowledge Extraction via Sparse Embedding Regression (KESER) with Multi-Center Large Scale Electronic Health Record Data 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- CONSORT-TM: Text classification models for assessing the completeness of randomized controlled trial publications 95%
- Large Language Models Improve the Identification of Emergency Department Visits for Symptomatic Kidney Stones 95%
- EHR Foundation Models Improve Robustness in the Presence of Temporal Distribution Shift 93%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.