REVIEW 2 cited by
Experience Retrieval-Augmentation with Electronic Health Records Enables Accurate Discharge QA
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Experience Retrieval-Augmentation with Electronic Health Records Enables Accurate Discharge QA
read the original abstract
To improve the reliability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in clinical applications, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is extensively applied to provide factual medical knowledge. However, beyond general medical knowledge from open-ended datasets, clinical case-based knowledge is also critical for effective medical reasoning, as it provides context grounded in real-world patient experiences.Motivated by this, we propose Experience Retrieval-Augmentation ExpRAG framework based on Electronic Health Record(EHR), aiming to offer the relevant context from other patients' discharge reports. ExpRAG performs retrieval through a coarse-to-fine process, utilizing an EHR-based report ranker to efficiently identify similar patients, followed by an experience retriever to extract task-relevant content for enhanced medical reasoning.To evaluate ExpRAG, we introduce DischargeQA, a clinical QA dataset with 1,280 discharge-related questions across diagnosis, medication, and instruction tasks. Each problem is generated using EHR data to ensure realistic and challenging scenarios. Experimental results demonstrate that ExpRAG consistently outperforms a text-based ranker, achieving an average relative improvement of 5.2%, highlighting the importance of case-based knowledge for medical reasoning.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Contradictions in Context: Challenges for Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Healthcare
Contradictions between highly similar medical abstracts degrade the factual accuracy and consistency of LLM responses in retrieval-augmented generation.
-
Ten Headache Specialists versus Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Literature Summarization: A Critical Evaluation and Comparison
Headache specialists preferred their own literature summaries over those from Sonnet, GPT-4o, and Llama 3.1 in a blinded evaluation, though AI summaries were sometimes indistinguishable.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.