arXiv:2609.14825v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are often deemed unsafe for clinical question answering because of their tendency to hallucinate. Retrieval augmentation...
By Zeyu Dong, Benjamin Wang, Joyee W. Jin
arXiv:2508. 14817v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Objective: To evaluate whether retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) can serve as an efficient alternative to long-context prompting for clinical reasoning over electronic health records (EHRs).
By Skatje Myers, Dmitriy Dligach, Timothy A. Miller, Samantha Barr, James Landefeld, Yanjun Gao, Matthew Churpek, Anoop Mayampurath, Majid Afshar
arXiv:2606. 16890v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Aggregate accuracy benchmarks conceal a systematic structure in how large language models fail at electronic health record (EHR) question answering: questions requiring more inferential steps produce disproportionately more errors.
By Sanjay Basu
arXiv:2607. 04223v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) reduces but does not eliminate hallucination, and existing detectors return a single answer-level score that does not indicate which sentence is unsupported, or why.
By Mohamed Aly Bouke
The paper introduces a retrieval‑augmented multi‑agent framework that automatically generates instance‑specific evaluation rubrics for medical language models. By retrieving authoritative medical evidence, decomposing it into atomic facts, and combining these with user interaction constraints, the system produces fine‑grained criteria that outperform GPT‑4o on HealthBench and LLMEval‑Med. The generated rubrics also guide response refinement, improving medical LLM output quality by 9.2%.
By Yinzhu Chen, Abdine Maiga, Hossein A. Rahmani, Emine Yilmaz
arXiv:2604. 04593v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) grounds large language models in external medical knowledge, yet standard retrievers frequently surface hard negatives that are semantically close to the query but describe clinically distinct conditions.
By Byeolhee Kim, Min-Kyung Kim, Young-Hak Kim, Tae-Joon Jeon
arXiv:2606. 15449v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Electronic prior authorization workflows require FHIR Questionnaire items to carry LOINC codes, yet most items in the HL7 Da Vinci CDS-Library lack these bindings.
By Maxim Gorshkov
arXiv:2608. 12138v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: General-purpose large language models (LLMs) have recently been reported to match or exceed specialized clinical AI tools on medical benchmarks, but such comparisons draw on a narrow set of systems and on benchmarks developed largely in high-income settings.
By Praveen Reddy, Charuta Mandke, Suvrankar Datta, Sarah Khan, Siddharth Reddy Anthireddy, Shitij Arora, Vishal Singh
arXiv:2606. 23992v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Clinical value sets define the standardized terminology codes used in quality measurement, phenotyping, cohort construction, and clinical decision support.
By Sumit Mukherjee
The paper presents a system for the MedReason 2026 challenge that tackles both multiple‑choice and open‑ended medical visual question answering using offline, containerized inference. Key findings include that comparing answer semantics rather than labels boosts retrieval‑only accuracy from 20.0 % to 57.5 % on a 200‑case holdout, and that varying the number of in‑prompt retrieved examples has minimal impact on final accuracy (93.5 %–94.0 %). The final system achieves 94.0 % MCQ accuracy on the development set and 93.20 % on the official pre‑evaluation, far surpassing the off‑the‑shelf baseline.
"whyItMatters":"The results demonstrate that semantic‑aware retrieval and careful adapter tuning can dramatically improve medical VQA performance, offering a practical approach for high‑accuracy, offline inference in clinical settings."
By Tristan Kirscher (ICube, Institut Strauss), Niklas C. Koser (CAU), Soren Pirk (CAU)
arXiv:2606. 05970v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: 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.
By Martin Murin
arXiv:2608. 14551v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for title-abstract screening in systematic reviews, but their decisions lack calibrated uncertainty.
By Arya Rahgozar, Pouria Mortezaagha