Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
51 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
60 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
8 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

The Evolving Landscape of Generative Large Language Models and Traditional Natural Language Processing in Medicine (2505.10261v1)

Published 15 May 2025 in cs.CL and cs.AI

Abstract: Natural language processing (NLP) has been traditionally applied to medicine, and generative LLMs have become prominent recently. However, the differences between them across different medical tasks remain underexplored. We analyzed 19,123 studies, finding that generative LLMs demonstrate advantages in open-ended tasks, while traditional NLP dominates in information extraction and analysis tasks. As these technologies advance, ethical use of them is essential to ensure their potential in medical applications.

Analyzing the Landscape of Generative LLMs and Traditional NLP in Medicine

The paper entitled "The Evolving Landscape of Generative LLMs and Traditional Natural Language Processing in Medicine" provides a comprehensive analysis of the distinct applications and research focuses of generative LLMs and traditional NLP methods across various medical tasks. By synthesizing findings from 19,123 studies, the authors identify specific areas where each technology excels and offers insights into the potential synergies and challenges in their integration into medical applications.

Study Methodology and Findings

The paper systematically categorizes relevant literature into two distinct groups: studies focusing on generative LLMs and those emphasizing traditional NLP approaches. Leveraging topic modeling techniques, the researchers unveil significant disparities in the task allocation and semantic space between these groups. The analysis highlights how generative LLMs display a concentrated focus on open-ended tasks, such as medical education and text summarization, where they outperform traditional NLP methods, which continue to dominate tasks requiring structured data extraction, like electronic health records and named entity recognition.

Key Numerical Insights

Notably, generative LLMs accounted for 72.23% of studies within the "Medical Education" category, reflecting their prowess in generating scalable and flexible educational content. Contrastingly, traditional NLP methods held 23.62% prominence in "Electronic Health Records" tasks, underscoring their continued utility in information extraction and processing.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

This exploration into the distinct niches of LLMs and traditional NLP highlights their complementary roles in advancing medical applications. LLMs are lauded for their adaptability in handling diverse and dynamic content, offering promising avenues for tasks involving complex reasoning and interdisciplinary integration, such as cross-modal analysis and medical education. On the theoretical front, this signals a shift in NLP research toward developing models that can navigate large-scale unstructured data with increased autonomy and creativity.

However, despite their potential, generative LLMs face critical challenges in clinical deployment, particularly concerning reasoning transparency and integration depth. The paper stresses the necessity for meticulously addressing ethical considerations related to privacy and bias, essential for fostering trust in medical AI systems.

Speculation on Future Developments

The ongoing evolution of models like Gemini 2.5 and OpenAI-o3 suggests a trajectory toward enhancing reasoning capabilities and clinical decision-support systems. Future developments may focus on creating hybrid systems that blend the strengths of generative LLMs with the precision of traditional NLP models, paving the way for more intelligent, context-aware medical AI tools. As these systems mature, the role of healthcare professionals may pivot towards integrating AI tools into practice while maintaining critical human oversight to ensure patient-centric care.

In conclusion, the comparative analysis presented in this paper offers a nuanced understanding of the evolving roles of LLMs and traditional NLP in medical domains, spotlighting opportunities for innovative applications while addressing the imperative for ethical and responsible AI deployment.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (15)
  1. Rui Yang (221 papers)
  2. Huitao Li (3 papers)
  3. Matthew Yu Heng Wong (1 paper)
  4. YuHe Ke (9 papers)
  5. Xin Li (980 papers)
  6. Kunyu Yu (3 papers)
  7. Jingchi Liao (1 paper)
  8. Jonathan Chong Kai Liew (1 paper)
  9. Sabarinath Vinod Nair (2 papers)
  10. Jasmine Chiat Ling Ong (10 papers)
  11. Irene Li (47 papers)
  12. Douglas Teodoro (16 papers)
  13. Chuan Hong (25 papers)
  14. Daniel Shu Wei Ting (17 papers)
  15. Nan Liu (140 papers)
Youtube Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com