Large language models are increasingly used for structured extraction from clinical free-text notes, but the sensitivity of their output to upstream configuration choices is less understood than their accuracy on fixed benchmarks. This work measures that sensitivity without human-annotated ground truth, by holding the extraction task fixed and varying one choice at a time. The fixed schema comprises 17 clinical documentation flags on a three-way yes/no/not_documented value set and a 47-tag vocabulary for the primary admission reason. Three prompt variants expressing this schema were each run at two model sizes on MIMIC-IV v3.1 discharge summaries. Cross-prompt agreement was measured by Cohen's kappa on ICD-stratified subsets. A paired same-note comparison isolated the effect of model choice, and a post-hoc collapse of the three-way flags to binary tested the schema's contribution to disagreement. On the three-way flags, the two models reach the same pooled cross-prompt agreement (median kappa 0.69 and 0.68); the larger model raises agreement on some fields and lowers it on others, a redistribution rather than the absence of an effect. Collapsing the schema to binary dissolves most of the cross-prompt disagreement, locating it on the absence-versus-silence distinction rather than on whether the finding is present. On the multi-class admission categorization, changing the model reassigns the dominant tag on close to half of all notes while changing the prompt phrasing reassigns it on roughly one in eight, and the larger model places far less mass on residual catch-all categories (44% to 26%). These patterns indicate a schema-imposed source of disagreement concentrated on the absence-versus-silence axis and a dominance of model over prompt phrasing on multi-class categorization, identified by a reusable methodology for auditing extraction reproducibility on a population-scale deployment.
Digital healthcare generates vast amounts of clinical text that can support AI-assisted applications, yet German biomedical language models remain limited by older architectures or restricted training data. We present ChristBERT (Clinical- and Healthcare-Related Issues and Subjects Tuned BERT), a family of domain-specific German RoBERTa-based language models trained on a 13.5GB corpus of scientific publications, clinical texts, health-related web content, and translated clinical resources. To investigate the impact of domain adaptation strategies in German clinical NLP, we compare continued pre-training, training from scratch, and domain-specific vocabulary adaptation. The resulting models are evaluated on three medical named entity recognition tasks and two text classification tasks. ChristBERT consistently outperforms existing general-purpose and medical German language models on four of five benchmarks and establishes a new state of the art for German clinical language modeling. Our results show that the optimal adaptation strategy is task-dependent: in our evaluation, training from scratch is particularly effective for highly specialized clinical texts, whereas continued pre-training performs well on more commonly written medical texts. All models are publicly released to support future research and applications in German medical NLP.