Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Improving Meditron for Medical Coding Through Fine-Tuning: A Comparative Evaluation Against GPT-4
Coralie Galland-Decker1, Muaziza Ursenbacher1, Christophe Nunes1
1Medical informatics, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland.
Large language models (LLMs) show potential for medical coding, but accuracy varies. GPT-4 and Meditron-CHUV performed differently across specialties, with SNOMED-CT codes often invalid, highlighting the need for hybrid approaches.
Area of Science:
- Medical Informatics
- Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Clinical Documentation
Background:
- Medical coding is crucial for healthcare billing and clinical record-keeping but presents significant challenges.
- Previous studies indicated limitations in large language model (LLM) accuracy for medical coding tasks.
- The need for efficient and accurate diagnostic coding is paramount in modern healthcare systems.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the performance of GPT-4 and a fine-tuned LLM (Meditron-CHUV) in generating International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) and Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms (SNOMED-CT) admission diagnoses from clinical anamnesis.
- To evaluate clinician preference and performance variations across medical specialties.
Main Methods:
- A comparative study involving GPT-4 and Meditron-CHUV, fine-tuned on clinical data from Lausanne University Hospital.
- Generation of ICD-10 and SNOMED-CT diagnoses from 40 synthetic clinical vignettes based on anamnesis alone.
- Blind evaluation of generated diagnoses by five clinicians, assessing overall preference and specialty-specific performance.
Main Results:
- GPT-4 was generally preferred by clinicians, but Meditron-CHUV demonstrated superior performance in adult medicine.
- Model performance varied significantly by medical specialty (p < 0.001), but not by the clinicians' professional background.
- Despite plausible labels, SNOMED-CT codes generated by both models were systematically invalid.
Conclusions:
- Current LLMs have limitations in generating accurate and valid medical codes, particularly for SNOMED-CT.
- The choice of LLM for medical coding should consider the specific clinical specialty.
- Hybrid approaches combining LLM capabilities with retrieval-augmented generation and ontologies are recommended for improved accuracy and validity. Real-world data validation is the next step.
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic illness...
Improving Translational Accuracy
Improving Translational Accuracy
Standards of Care II
Methods of Documentation II: POMR
Methods of Documentation III: PIE