Banner Banner

Development of an LLM Pipeline Exceeding Physician-documented Cardiovascular Risk Scores under routine clinical conditions.

Tobias Roeschl
Marie Hoffmann
Axel Unbehaun
Henryk Dreger
Gerhard Hindricks
Volkmar Falk
Ran Balicer
Radu Tanacli
Felix Hohendanner
Alexander Meyer.

July 28, 2026

Background

Risk scores are essential to evidence-based cardiovascular care, but manual calculation is labor-intensive and error-prone. Large language models (LLMs) could automate this process, yet LLMs are limited by their propensity for calculation errors and factual hallucinations. Pipelines separating LLM-based data extraction from deterministic score computation may improve reliability and transparency.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective diagnostic study at a quaternary heart center in Germany (January 2020 – July 2023). Patients with atrial fibrillation (n=179) from an ablation registry and patients with severe aortic stenosis (n=76) evaluated by a heart team were included. Six LLMs (GPT-5.2, Gemini 3.1 Pro, DeepSeek-R1, Qwen3, GPT-OSS 120B, and Kimi K2.5) were tested in standalone, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), and pipeline configurations to compute HAS-BLED, CHA2DS2-VASc, and EuroSCORE II scores from routine clinical reports. Accuracy was assessed against expert-adjudicated ground truth using root mean squared error (RMSE) and Krippendorff’s alpha to evaluate numerical deviation and categorical agreement, respectively.

Results

Pipeline-generated scores showed substantially higher agreement with expert adjudication than standalone LLMs, LLMs with RAG, and treating physicians (mean Krippendorff’s alpha: 0.78 vs 0.32 vs 0.39 vs 0.31) and lower deviation from ground truth (mean RMSE: 0.89 vs 5.81 vs 1.85 vs 1.34).

Conclusion

Pipelines combining expert-curated knowledge injection, LLM-based clinical data extraction, and deterministic score calculation enable accurate and scalable cardiovascular risk score computation from unstructured real-world clinical data, outperforming physician-documented scores. Such pipelines could form the basis for clinical decision-support systems that automate routine risk assessment, reduce clinician workload, and promote more consistent evidence-based care.