Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Development and Testing of Retrieval Augmented Generation in Large Language Models -- A Case Study Report

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

arxiv 2402.01733 v1 pith:V5N7NI3I submitted 2024-01-29 cs.CL cs.AI

Development and Testing of Retrieval Augmented Generation in Large Language Models -- A Case Study Report

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords modelllm-ragretrievalaccuracycasehealthcarehuman-generatedllms
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Purpose: Large Language Models (LLMs) hold significant promise for medical applications. Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) emerges as a promising approach for customizing domain knowledge in LLMs. This case study presents the development and evaluation of an LLM-RAG pipeline tailored for healthcare, focusing specifically on preoperative medicine. Methods: We developed an LLM-RAG model using 35 preoperative guidelines and tested it against human-generated responses, with a total of 1260 responses evaluated. The RAG process involved converting clinical documents into text using Python-based frameworks like LangChain and Llamaindex, and processing these texts into chunks for embedding and retrieval. Vector storage techniques and selected embedding models to optimize data retrieval, using Pinecone for vector storage with a dimensionality of 1536 and cosine similarity for loss metrics. Human-generated answers, provided by junior doctors, were used as a comparison. Results: The LLM-RAG model generated answers within an average of 15-20 seconds, significantly faster than the 10 minutes typically required by humans. Among the basic LLMs, GPT4.0 exhibited the best accuracy of 80.1%. This accuracy was further increased to 91.4% when the model was enhanced with RAG. Compared to the human-generated instructions, which had an accuracy of 86.3%, the performance of the GPT4.0 RAG model demonstrated non-inferiority (p=0.610). Conclusions: In this case study, we demonstrated a LLM-RAG model for healthcare implementation. The pipeline shows the advantages of grounded knowledge, upgradability, and scalability as important aspects of healthcare LLM deployment.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Ten Headache Specialists versus Artificial Intelligence for Clinical Literature Summarization: A Critical Evaluation and Comparison

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    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.

  2. FHIR-RAG-MEDS: Integrating HL7 FHIR with Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models for Enhanced Medical Decision Support

    cs.AI 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0

    FHIR-RAG-MEDS integrates HL7 FHIR patient summaries into a RAG system and reports improved guideline-based recommendation quality over bare medical LLMs across four clinical domains.