The ChemoTimelines shared task benchmarks methods for constructing timelines of systemic anticancer treatment from electronic health records of cancer patients. This paper describes our methods, results, and findings for subtask 2—generating patient chemotherapy timelines from raw clinical notes. We evaluated strategies involving chain-of-thought thinking, supervised fine-tuning, direct preference optimization, and dictionary-based lookup to improve timeline extraction. All of our approaches followed a two-step workflow, wherein an LLM first extracted chemotherapy events from individual clinical notes, and then an algorithm normalized and aggregated events into patient-level timelines. Each specific method differed in how the associated LLM was utilized and trained. Multiple approaches yielded competitive performances on the test set leaderboard, with fine-tuned Qwen3-14B achieving the best official score of 0.678. Our results and analyses could provide useful insights for future attempts on this task as well as the design of similar tasks.

Several studies have shown that Large Language Models (LLMs) can answer medical questions correctly, even outperforming the average human score in some medical exams. However, to our knowledge, no study has been conducted to assess the ability of language models to validate existing or generated medical text for correctness and consistency. In this paper, we introduce MEDEC (https://github.com/abachaa/MEDEC), the first publicly available benchmark for medical error detection and correction in clinical notes, covering five types of errors (Diagnosis, Management, Treatment, Pharmacotherapy, and Causal Organism). MEDEC consists of 3,848 clinical texts, including 488 clinical notes from three US hospital systems that were not previously seen by any LLM. The dataset has been used in the MEDIQA-CORR 2024 shared task to evaluate seventeen participating systems. In this paper, we describe the data creation methods and we evaluate recent LLMs (e.g., o1-preview, GPT-4, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 2.0 Flash, and DeepSeek-R1) for the tasks of detecting and correcting medical errors requiring both medical knowledge and reasoning capabilities. We also conducted a comparative study where two medical doctors performed the same task on the MEDEC test set. The results showed that MEDEC is a sufficiently challenging benchmark to assess the ability of models to validate existing or generated notes and to correct medical errors. We also found that although recent LLMs have a good performance in error detection and correction, they are still outperformed by medical doctors in these tasks. We discuss the potential factors behind this gap, the insights from our experiments, the limitations of current evaluation metrics, and share potential pointers for future research.

Remote patient care provides opportunities for expanding medical access, saving healthcare costs, and offering on-demand convenient services. In the MEDIQA-M3G 2024 Shared Task, researchers explored solutions for the specific task of dermatological consumer health visual question answering, where user generated queries and images are used as input and a free-text answer response is generated as output. In this novel challenge, eight teams with a total of 48 submissions were evaluated across three language test sets. In this work, we provide a summary of the dataset, as well as results and approaches. We hope that the insights learned here will inspire future research directions that can lead to technology that deburdens clinical workload and improves care.

Automatic detection and correction of medical errors enables a more rigorous validation of medical documentation as well as clinical notes generated by large language models. Such solutions can ensure the accuracy and medical coherence of clinical texts and enhance patient care and health outcomes. The MEDIQA-CORR 2024 shared task focused on detecting and correcting different types of medical errors in clinical texts. Seventeen teams participated in the shared task and experimented with a broad range of approaches and models. In this paper, we describe the MEDIQA-CORR task, datasets, and the participants’ results and methods.