Paper detail

Relation Extraction Capabilities of LLMs on Clinical Text: A Bilingual Evaluation for English and Turkish

The scarcity of annotated datasets for clinical information extraction in non-English languages hinders the evaluation of large language model (LLM)-based methods developed primarily in English. In this study, we present the first comprehensive bilingual evaluation of LLMs for the clinical Relation Extraction (RE) task in both English and Turkish. To facilitate this evaluation, we introduce the first English-Turkish parallel clinical RE dataset, derived and carefully curated from the 2010 i2b2/VA relation classification corpus. We systematically assess a diverse set of prompting strategies, including multiple in-context learning (ICL) and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) approaches, and compare their performance to fine-tuned baselines such as PURE. Furthermore, we propose Relation-Aware Retrieval (RAR), a novel in-context example selection method based on contrastive learning, that is specifically designed to capture both sentence-level and relation-level semantics. Our results show that prompting-based LLM approaches consistently outperform traditional fine-tuned models. Moreover, evaluations for English performed better than their Turkish counterparts across all evaluated LLMs and prompting techniques. Among ICL methods, RAR achieves the highest performance, with Gemini 1.5 Flash reaching a micro-F1 score of 0.906 in English and 0.888 in Turkish. Performance further improves to 0.918 F1 in English when RAR is combined with a structured reasoning prompt using the DeepSeek-V3 model. These findings highlight the importance of high-quality demonstration retrieval and underscore the potential of advanced retrieval and prompting techniques to bridge resource gaps in clinical natural language processing.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.