Search

Automatic disease diagnosis has become increasingly valuable in clinical practice. The advent of large language models (LLMs) has catalyzed a paradigm shift in artificial intelligence, with growing evidence supporting the efficacy of LLMs in diagnostic tasks. Despite the increasing attention in this field, a holistic view is still lacking. Many critical aspects remain unclear, such as the diseases and clinical data to which LLMs have been applied, the LLM techniques employed, and the evaluation methods used. In this article, we perform a comprehensive review of LLM-based methods for disease diagnosis. Our review examines the existing literature across various dimensions, including disease types and associated clinical specialties, clinical data, LLM techniques, and evaluation methods. Additionally, we offer recommendations for applying and evaluating LLMs for diagnostic tasks. Furthermore, we assess the limitations of current research and discuss future directions. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive review for LLM-based disease diagnosis., Comment: 69 pages

Methodological advancements to automate the generation of differential diagnosis (DDx) to predict a list of potential diseases as differentials given patients' symptom descriptions are critical to clinical reasoning and applications such as decision support. However, providing reasoning or interpretation for these differential diagnoses is more meaningful. Fortunately, large language models (LLMs) possess powerful language processing abilities and have been proven effective in various related tasks. Motivated by this potential, we investigate the use of LLMs for interpretable DDx. First, we develop a new DDx dataset with expert-derived interpretation on 570 public clinical notes. Second, we propose a novel framework, named Dual-Inf, that enables LLMs to conduct bidirectional inference for interpretation. Both human and automated evaluation demonstrate the effectiveness of Dual-Inf in predicting differentials and diagnosis explanations. Specifically, the performance improvement of Dual-Inf over the baseline methods exceeds 32% w.r.t. BERTScore in DDx interpretation. Furthermore, experiments verify that Dual-Inf (1) makes fewer errors in interpretation, (2) has great generalizability, (3) is promising for rare disease diagnosis and explanation., Comment: 15 pages

Deep learning has enabled breakthroughs in automated diagnosis from medical imaging, with many successful applications in ophthalmology. However, standard medical image classification approaches only assess disease presence at the time of acquisition, neglecting the common clinical setting of longitudinal imaging. For slow, progressive eye diseases like age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), patients undergo repeated imaging over time to track disease progression and forecasting the future risk of developing disease is critical to properly plan treatment. Our proposed Longitudinal Transformer for Survival Analysis (LTSA) enables dynamic disease prognosis from longitudinal medical imaging, modeling the time to disease from sequences of fundus photography images captured over long, irregular time periods. Using longitudinal imaging data from the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) and Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS), LTSA significantly outperformed a single-image baseline in 19/20 head-to-head comparisons on late AMD prognosis and 18/20 comparisons on POAG prognosis. A temporal attention analysis also suggested that, while the most recent image is typically the most influential, prior imaging still provides additional prognostic value., Comment: Accepted to npj Digital Medicine

Objectives: Medical research faces substantial challenges from noisy labels attributed to factors like inter-expert variability and machine-extracted labels. Despite this, the adoption of label noise management remains limited, and label noise is largely ignored. To this end, there is a critical need to conduct a scoping review focusing on the problem space. This scoping review aims to comprehensively review label noise management in deep learning-based medical prediction problems, which includes label noise detection, label noise handling, and evaluation. Research involving label uncertainty is also included. Methods: Our scoping review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched 4 databases, including PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Google Scholar, and Semantic Scholar. Our search terms include "noisy label AND medical / healthcare / clinical", "un-certainty AND medical / healthcare / clinical", and "noise AND medical / healthcare / clinical". Results: A total of 60 papers met inclusion criteria between 2016 and 2023. A series of practical questions in medical research are investigated. These include the sources of label noise, the impact of label noise, the detection of label noise, label noise handling techniques, and their evaluation. Categorization of both label noise detection methods and handling techniques are provided. Discussion: From a methodological perspective, we observe that the medical community has been up to date with the broader deep-learning community, given that most techniques have been evaluated on medical data. We recommend considering label noise as a standard element in medical research, even if it is not dedicated to handling noisy labels. Initial experiments can start with easy-to-implement methods, such as noise-robust loss functions, weighting, and curriculum learning.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have the potential to revolutionize clinical practices, including improving diagnostic accuracy and surgical decision-making, while also reducing costs and manpower. However, it is important to recognize that these systems may perpetuate social inequities or demonstrate biases, such as those based on race or gender. Such biases can occur before, during, or after the development of AI models, making it critical to understand and address potential biases to enable the accurate and reliable application of AI models in clinical settings. To mitigate bias concerns during model development, we surveyed recent publications on different debiasing methods in the fields of biomedical natural language processing (NLP) or computer vision (CV). Then we discussed the methods that have been applied in the biomedical domain to address bias. We performed our literature search on PubMed, ACM digital library, and IEEE Xplore of relevant articles published between January 2018 and December 2023 using multiple combinations of keywords. We then filtered the result of 10,041 articles automatically with loose constraints, and manually inspected the abstracts of the remaining 890 articles to identify the 55 articles included in this review. Additional articles in the references are also included in this review. We discuss each method and compare its strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we review other potential methods from the general domain that could be applied to biomedicine to address bias and improve fairness.The bias of AIs in biomedicine can originate from multiple sources. Existing debiasing methods that focus on algorithms can be categorized into distributional or algorithmic.

Purpose: Limited studies exploring concrete methods or approaches to tackle and enhance model fairness in the radiology domain. Our proposed AI model utilizes supervised contrastive learning to minimize bias in CXR diagnosis. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, we evaluated our proposed method on two datasets: the Medical Imaging and Data Resource Center (MIDRC) dataset with 77,887 CXR images from 27,796 patients collected as of April 20, 2023 for COVID-19 diagnosis, and the NIH Chest X-ray (NIH-CXR) dataset with 112,120 CXR images from 30,805 patients collected between 1992 and 2015. In the NIH-CXR dataset, thoracic abnormalities include atelectasis, cardiomegaly, effusion, infiltration, mass, nodule, pneumonia, pneumothorax, consolidation, edema, emphysema, fibrosis, pleural thickening, or hernia. Our proposed method utilizes supervised contrastive learning with carefully selected positive and negative samples to generate fair image embeddings, which are fine-tuned for subsequent tasks to reduce bias in chest X-ray (CXR) diagnosis. We evaluated the methods using the marginal AUC difference ($\delta$ mAUC). Results: The proposed model showed a significant decrease in bias across all subgroups when compared to the baseline models, as evidenced by a paired T-test (p<0.0001). The $\delta$ mAUC obtained by our method were 0.0116 (95\% CI, 0.0110-0.0123), 0.2102 (95% CI, 0.2087-0.2118), and 0.1000 (95\% CI, 0.0988-0.1011) for sex, race, and age on MIDRC, and 0.0090 (95\% CI, 0.0082-0.0097) for sex and 0.0512 (95% CI, 0.0512-0.0532) for age on NIH-CXR, respectively. Conclusion: Employing supervised contrastive learning can mitigate bias in CXR diagnosis, addressing concerns of fairness and reliability in deep learning-based diagnostic methods., Comment: 23 pages, 5 figures