A Multi-Agent System for Autonomous, Fine-Tuning-Free Clinical Symptom Detection: Development and Validation Study
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Clinical notes contain many of the signs and symptoms that bring patients to care, yet this information rarely reaches structured fields. Existing extraction approaches either rely on context-insensitive rules that generate false positives or on supervised models that require substantial fine-tuning. We present Pythia, a multi-agent system that autonomously writes and optimizes extraction prompts for clinical concepts without manual prompt engineering or fine-tuning. Running on a locally hosted open-weights model, Pythia keeps clinical notes on local infrastructure and selects prompts using development-set sensitivity and specificity. We compared Pythia with a curated lexicon across 72 signs and symptoms from 400 clinical notes representing 387 patients. Development (n=300) and validation (n=100) sets were partitioned independently for each concept. Pythia achieved mean sensitivity of 0.76 and specificity of 0.95, compared with 0.82 and 0.76 for the lexicon, and matched or exceeded the lexicon on both metrics for 20 of 62 directly comparable concepts. For 14 concepts where the lexicon labeled every note positive, Pythia recovered mean specificity of 0.97 by requiring a present-tense, patient-attributed finding rather than any textual mention of a term. Specificity transferred from development to validation with minimal degradation across prevalences, whereas sensitivity transfer weakened below 5% prevalence, reaching a mean gap of 0.25 below 2% prevalence. A BERT classifier fine-tuned per concept on the same development set achieved mean sensitivity of 0.23 and collapsed to zero sensitivity for concepts below roughly 5% prevalence. These findings suggest that autonomous, fine-tuning-free prompt optimization can produce symptom extraction prompts that generalize effectively from development to validation while remaining deployable on local infrastructure.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jul 2026.
Builds on
14 of 31 references.
References · 14
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,386
- 2022Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineerscited by 1,045
- 2020Domain-Specific Language Model Pretraining for Biomedical Natural Language Processingcited by 1,009
- 2019Publicly Available Clinical BERT Embeddingscited by 1,002
- 2023Large Language Models as Optimizerscited by 864
- 2023DSPy: Compiling Declarative Language Model Calls into Self-Improving Pipelinescited by 832
- 2022Large Language Models are Few-Shot Clinical Information Extractorscited by 207
- 2023Benchmarking large language models for biomedical natural language processing applications and recommendationscited by 78
- 2023LLMs Accelerate Annotation for Medical Information Extractioncited by 77
- 2019Enhancing Clinical Concept Extraction with Contextual Embeddingscited by 48
- 2019Natural Language Processing of Clinical Notes on Chronic Diseases: Systematic Reviewcited by 36
- 2024Information Extraction from Clinical Notes: Are We Ready to Switch to Large Language Models?cited by 9
Built on by
Not cited yet.