The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enhancing LLM-based clinical reasoning in anesthesiology via graph-augmented retrieval and explainable generation
Open accessAbstract
Purpose This study aims to enhance the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in anesthesiology decision support, leveraging a graph-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) framework to improve analytical reasoning and deliver evidence-driven results. Methods Based on various clinical guidelines and textbooks, we constructed an Anesthesiology Knowledge Graph using UMLS as a reference ontology. We present a graph-based RAG framework, AnesGraph-RAG, which integrates pre-retrieval judgment, hybrid retrieval, and tailored Chain-of-Thought prompting to enhance reasoning performance. Its variant AnesGraph-RAG-UD further incorporates unfamiliarity-driven graph retrieval and structural querying to improve token efficiency. Results The constructed anesthesiology knowledge graph comprises 212313 entities and 529845 relations. Evaluation on the expert-annotated dataset confirms its high entity recall (82.19%) and precision (82.13%). Evaluations on the Anesthesiology Attending Physician Qualification Examination dataset indicate that our framework achieves superior performance over ChatGPT - 3.5-turbo, ChatGPT-4o, and DeepSeek-V3, with relative improvements of 2.4%, 7.3%, and 3.7% in average accuracy, respectively. The performance gains are particularly pronounced in domains assessing professional knowledge and professional practical skills. In addition, our case study demonstrates that the enhanced post-hoc explanation module offers reasoning paths supported by more detailed evidence. Conclusion In conclusion, by integrating structured domain knowledge with adaptive reasoning mechanisms, our graph-based RAG framework improves both the accuracy and interpretability of LLM responses in anesthesiology tasks. These results demonstrate the practical value of combining domain-specific knowledge graphs with LLMs in clinical decision support.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The retrieval, reasoning, and verification integrated together within coordinated agents, the system would be able to manage heterogeneous tasks such as guideline interpretation, summarisation, and differential diagnosis, all within a single framework [27].”
From Multi-Agent Retrieval Augmented Generation for Clinical Decision Support: A Systematic Review and Integrative Conceptual Framework (2026) · cites this paper as [27]
In the citing paper
“Some explanations cite specific, retrievable evidence, e.g. RAG-grounded source citations or knowledge-graph paths, enabling independent verification . This characterizes the RAG-grounded approaches in our review [63, 87,91,92,94,99].”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [99]
In the citing paper
“This is particularly consequential given the growing prominence of Chinese-language medical LLMs and knowledge graph approaches, as well as the identified importance of models such as Qwen, DeepSeek, and ChatGLM in our reviewed studies [78,87,99].”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [99]
In the citing paper
“This is particularly consequential given the growing prominence of Chinese-language medical LLMs and knowledge graph approaches, as well as the identified importance of models such as Qwen, DeepSeek, and ChatGLM in our reviewed studies [78,87,99].”
From Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [99]
Citations
Cites
Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models
Kaplan, J., McCandlish, S., Henighan, T., Brown, T. B., Chess, B., Child, R., Gray, S., Radford, A., Wu, J., & Amodei, D. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.08361 · Cited by 9,550 · cited 1×
“As observed in works such as [15, 16], the performance of these models improves predictably with increased scale of model parameters, data, and computation.”
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3703155 · Cited by 4,688
Chen, J., Xiao, S., Zhang, P., Luo, K., Lian, D., & Liu, Z. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.137 · Cited by 757
Unlocking the opportunities through ChatGPT Tool towards ameliorating the education system
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R. P., Khan, S., & Khan, I. H. (2023) · BenchCouncil Transactions on Benchmarks, Standards and Evaluations · doi:10.1016/j.tbench.2023.100115 · Cited by 535 · cited 3×
“They also support clinical decision-making by offering rapid access to research [25], treatment guidelines, and drug information [26, 27, 29], aiding in chronic disease management and personalized care strategies [36].”
Liu, S., McCoy, A. B., & Wright, A. (2025) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaf008 · Cited by 200 · cited 1×
“Recent studies demonstrated that RAG implementation increased outcomes by 1.35 times compared to baseline LLMs in medical scenarios [10], suggesting the potential of RAG in anesthesiology.”
InfluentialBiomedical knowledge graph-optimized prompt generation for large language models
Soman, K., Rose, P. W., Morris, J. H., Akbas, R. E., Smith, B., Peetoom, B., Villouta-Reyes, C., Cerono, G., Shi, Y., Rizk-Jackson, A., et al. (2024) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btae560 · Cited by 135
Gebrael, G., Sahu, K. K., Chigarira, B., Tripathi, N., Mathew Thomas, V., Sayegh, N., Maughan, B. L., Agarwal, N., Swami, U., & Li, H. (2023) · Cancers · doi:10.3390/cancers15143717 · Cited by 85
Research works printed but not linked: 59
- Meara JG, Leather AJ, Hagander L, Alkire BC, Alonso N, Ameh EA, et al. Global surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. The lancet. 2015;386(9993):569–624. · DOI · Paper page
- Alamo CEE, Diatta F, Monsell SE, Lane-Fall MB. Artificial intelligence in anesthetic care: a survey of physician anesthesiologists. Anesthesia Analgesia. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000006752. · DOI · Paper page
- Hurst A, Lerer A, Goucher AP, Perelman A, Ramesh A, Clark A, Ostrow A, Welihinda A, Hayes A, Radford A, et al.: Gpt-4o system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276 2024. · arXiv
- Bedi S, Liu Y, Orr-Ewing L, Dash D, Koyejo S, Callahan A, et al. Testing and evaluation of health care applications of large language models: a systematic review. JAMA. 2024;333(4):319. · DOI · Paper page
- Malek MA, Velzen M, Dahan A, Martini C, Sitsen E, Sarton E, et al. Generation of preoperative anaesthetic plans by chatgpt-4.0: a mixed-method study. Br J Anaesthesia. 2024;134:1333. · DOI
- Lim DY, Ke YH, Sng GG, Tung JY, Chai JX, Abdullah HR. Large language models in anaesthesiology: use of chatgpt for American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification. Br J Anaesth. 2023;131(3):73–5. · DOI · Paper page
- Chung P, Fong CT, Walters AM, Aghaeepour N, Yetisgen M, O’Reilly-Shah VN. Large language model capabilities in perioperative risk prediction and prognostication. JAMA Surg. 2024;159(8):928–37. · DOI
- Fan W, Ding Y, Ning L, Wang S, Li H, Yin D, Chua T-S, Li Q. A survey on rag meeting LLMs: towards retrieval-augmented large language models. In: Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2024; pp. 6491–6501. · DOI · Paper page
- Edge D, Trinh H, Cheng N, Bradley J, Chao A, Mody A, Truitt S, Metropolitansky D, Ness RO, Larson J. From local to global: A graph rag approach to query-focused summarization. 2024. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16130 · arXiv
- Brown T, Mann B, Ryder N, Subbiah M, Kaplan JD, Dhariwal P, et al. Language models are few-shot learners. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2020;33:1877–901.
- Radford A, Wu J, Child R, Luan D, Amodei D, Sutskever I, et al. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI Blog. 2019;1(8):9.
- Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser L, Polosukhin I. Attention is all you need. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. NIPS’17, pp. 6000–6010. Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook; 2017.
- Hoffmann J, Borgeaud S, Mensch A, Buchatskaya E, Cai T, Rutherford E, Las Casas D, Hendricks LA, Welbl J, Clark A, Hennigan T, Noland E, Millican K, Driessche G, Damoc B, Guy A, Osindero S, Simonyan K, Elsen E, Vinyals O, Rae JW, Sifre L. Training compute-optimal large language models. In: Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. NIPS ’22. Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook; 2022.
- Lewis P, Perez E, Piktus A, Petroni F, Karpukhin V, Goyal N, et al. Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive NLP tasks. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2020;33:9459–74.
- Bodenreider O. The unified medical language system (UMLS): integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(suppl–1):267–70. · DOI · Paper page
- Guo D, Wu F, Zhu F, Leng F, Shi G, Chen H, Fan H, Wang J, Jiang J, Wang J, et al. Seed1. 5-vl technical report. 2025. arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.07062 · arXiv
- Asai A, Wu Z, Wang Y, Sil A, Hajishirzi H. Self-rag: Learning to retrieve, generate, and critique through self-reflection. In: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations; 2023.
- Wei J, Wang X, Schuurmans D, Bosma M, Xia F, Chi E, et al. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2022;35:24824–37.
- Maheshwari H, Tenneti S, Nakkiran A. CiteFix: Enhancing RAG accuracy through post-processing citation correction. In: Rehm G, Li Y (eds) Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 6: Industry Track), pp. 310–317. Association for Computational Linguistics, Vienna, Austria ; 2025. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.acl-industry.23 . https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-industry.23/ · DOI
- Chen J, Cai Z, Ji K, Wang X, Liu W, Wang R, Hou J, Wang B. Huatuogpt-o1, towards medical complex reasoning with llms. 2024. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.18925 · arXiv
- Abi-Rafeh J, Xu HH, Kazan R, Tevlin R, Furnas H. Large language models and artificial intelligence: a primer for plastic surgeons on the demonstrated and potential applications, promises, and limitations of chatgpt. Aesthetic Surg J. 2024;44(3):329–43. · DOI
- Tustumi F, Andreollo NA, Aguilar-Nascimento JE. Future of the language models in healthcare: the role of chatgpt. ABCD Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (são paulo). 2023;36:1727. · DOI · Paper page
- Zhang Y, Pei H, Zhen S, Li Q, Liang F. Chat generative pre-trained transformer (chatgpt) usage in healthcare. Gastroenterol Endosc. 2023;1(3):139–43. · DOI
- Bugaj M, Kliestik T, Lăzăroiu G. Generative artificial intelligence-based diagnostic algorithms in disease risk detection, in personalized and targeted healthcare procedures, and in patient care safety and quality. Contemp Read Law Soc Justice. 2023;15(1):9–26. · DOI
- Xiao D, Meyers P, Upperman JS, Robinson JR. Revolutionizing healthcare with chatgpt: an early exploration of an ai language model’s impact on medicine at large and its role in pediatric surgery. J Pediatr Surg. 2023;58(12):2410–5. · DOI
- Rajjoub R, Arroyave JS, Zaidat B, Ahmed W, Mejia MR, Tang J, et al. Chatgpt and its role in the decision-making for the diagnosis and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a comparative analysis and narrative review. Global Spine J. 2024;14(3):998–1017. · DOI
- Daher M, Koa J, Boufadel P, Singh J, Fares MY, Abboud JA. Breaking barriers: can chatgpt compete with a shoulder and elbow specialist in diagnosis and management? JSES Int. 2023;7(6):2534–41. · DOI
- Rizwan A, Sadiq T. The use of AI in diagnosing diseases and providing management plans: a consultation on cardiovascular disorders with chatgpt. Cureus. 2023;15(8):43106.
- Chen TC, Kaminski E, Koduri L, Singer A, Singer J, Couldwell M, et al. Chat gpt as a neuro-score calculator: analysis of a large language model’s performance on various neurological exam grading scales. World Neurosurg. 2023;179:342–7. · DOI · Paper page
- Xv Y, Peng C, Wei Z, Liao F, Xiao M. Can chat-gpt a substitute for urological resident physician in diagnosing diseases?: a preliminary conclusion from an exploratory investigation. World J Urol. 2023;41(9):2569–71. · DOI
- Grupac M, Zauskova A, Nica E. Generative artificial intelligence-based treatment planning in clinical decision-making, in precision medicine, and in personalized healthcare. Contemp Read Law & Social Justice. 2023;15(1):45. · DOI
- Atkinson D. Generative artificial intelligence-based treatment planning in patient consultation and support, in digital health interventions, and in medical practice and education. Contemp Read Law Soc Justice. 2023;15(1):134–51. · DOI
- Srivastav S, Chandrakar R, Gupta S, Babhulkar V, Agrawal S, Jaiswal A, et al. Chatgpt in radiology: the advantages and limitations of artificial intelligence for medical imaging diagnosis. Cureus. 2023;15(7):41435–41435.
- Gala D, Makaryus AN. The utility of language models in cardiology: a narrative review of the benefits and concerns of chatgpt-4. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(15):6438. · DOI
- Dave T, Athaluri SA, Singh S. Chatgpt in medicine: an overview of its applications, advantages, limitations, future prospects, and ethical considerations. Front Artif Intell. 2023;6:1169595. · DOI · Paper page
- Cheng K, Li Z, He Y, Guo Q, Lu Y, Gu S, et al. Potential use of artificial intelligence in infectious disease: take chatgpt as an example. Ann Biomed Eng. 2023;51(6):1130–5. · DOI
- Kottlors J, Bratke G, Rauen P, Kabbasch C, Persigehl T, Schlamann M, et al. Feasibility of differential diagnosis based on imaging patterns using a large language model. Radiology. 2023;308(1):231167. · DOI
- Schukow C, Smith SC, Landgrebe E, Parasuraman S, Folaranmi OO, Paner GP, et al. Application of chatgpt in routine diagnostic pathology: promises, pitfalls, and potential future directions. Adv Anat Pathol. 2024;31(1):15–21. · DOI
- Vaira LA, Lechien JR, Abbate V, Allevi F, Audino G, Beltramini GA, et al. Accuracy of chatgpt-generated information on head and neck and oromaxillofacial surgery: a multicenter collaborative analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2024;170(6):1492–503. · DOI
- Feng X, Jiang W, Wang Z, Luo Y, Xu P, Yu B, Jin H, Du B, Zhang J. Anesbench: multi-dimensional evaluation of llm reasoning in anesthesiology. 2025. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02404 · arXiv
- Zhou B, Zhan Y, Wang Z, Li Y, Zhang C, Yu B, et al. Benchmarking medical LLMs on anesthesiology: a comprehensive dataset in Chinese. IEEE Trans Emerging Topics Comput Intell. 2025;9(4):3057–71. https://doi.org/10.1109/TETCI.2024.3502465. · DOI
- Wang Z, Jiang J, Zhan Y, Zhou B, Li Y, Zhang C, et al. Hypnos: a domain-specific large language model for anesthesiology. Neurocomputing. 2025;624:129389. · DOI
- Gao Y, Qiao L, Kan Z, Wen Z, He Y, Li D. Two-stage generative question answering on temporal knowledge graph using large language models. In: Ku, L-W, Martins A, Srikumar V (eds.) Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, pp. 6719–6734. Association for Computational Linguistics, Bangkok, Thailand; 2024. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.401 . https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-acl.401/ · DOI
- Khandelwal U, Levy O, Jurafsky D, Zettlemoyer L, Lewis M. Generalization through memorization: Nearest neighbor language models. 2019. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.00172 · arXiv
- Sen P, Mavadia S, Saffari A. Knowledge graph-augmented language models for complex question answering. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Natural Language Reasoning and Structured Explanations (NLRSE), 2023; 1–8. · DOI
- Zhao P, Zhang H, Yu Q, Wang Z, Geng Y, Fu F, Yang L, Zhang W, Jiang J, Cui B. Retrieval-augmented generation for ai-generated content: a survey. 2024. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.19473 · arXiv
- Kang M, Kwak JM, Baek J, Hwang SJ. Knowledge graph-augmented language models for knowledge-grounded dialogue generation. 2023. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18846 · arXiv
- Li H, Li S, Sun J, Xing Z, Peng X, Liu M, Zhao X. Improving api caveats accessibility by mining api caveats knowledge graph. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), 2018;183–193. IEEE · DOI
- Luo L, Li Y-F, Haffari G, Pan S. Reasoning on graphs: faithful and interpretable large language model reasoning. 2023. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01061 · arXiv
- Varshney D, Zafar A, Behera NK, Ekbal A. Knowledge graph assisted end-to-end medical dialog generation. Artif Intell Med. 2023;139:102535. · DOI
- Yu D, Zhu C, Fang Y, Yu W, Wang S, Xu Y, Ren X, Yang Y, Zeng M. Kg-fid: Infusing knowledge graph in fusion-in-decoder for open-domain question answering. 2021. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.04330 · DOI
- Zhong L, Wu J, Li Q, Peng H, Wu X. A comprehensive survey on automatic knowledge graph construction. ACM Comput Surv. 2023;56(4):1–62. · DOI
- Izacard G, Caron M, Hosseini L, Riedel S, Bojanowski P, Joulin A, Grave E. Unsupervised dense information retrieval with contrastive learning. 2021. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.09118 · arXiv
- Jiang J, Zhou K, Zhao X, Li Y, Wen J-R. ReasoningLM: Enabling structural subgraph reasoning in pre-trained language models for question answering over knowledge graph. In: Bouamor H, Pino J, Bali K (eds) Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 3721–3735. Association for Computational Linguistics, Singapore; 2023. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.228 . https://aclanthology.org/2023.emnlp-main.228/ · DOI
- Liu Y, Wan Y, He L, Peng H, Yu PS. Kg-bart: Knowledge graph-augmented bart for generative commonsense reasoning. Proc AAAI Conf Artif Intell. 2021;35:6418–25.
- Tuan, Y-L, Chen, Y-N, Lee, H-y. DyKgChat: Benchmarking dialogue generation grounding on dynamic knowledge graphs. In: Inui K, Jiang J, Ng V, Wan X (eds) Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pp. 1855–1865. Association for Computational Linguistics, Hong Kong, China; 2019. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-1194 . https://aclanthology.org/D19-1194/ · DOI
- Wu S, Li Y, Zhang D, Zhou Y, Wu Z. Diverse and informative dialogue generation with context-specific commonsense knowledge awareness. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 2020; pp. 5811–5820. · DOI
- Zhang H, Liu Z, Xiong C, Liu Z. Grounded conversation generation as guided traverses in commonsense knowledge graphs. In: Jurafsky D, Chai J, Schluter N, Tetreault J (eds) Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 2031–2043. Association for Computational Linguistics; 2020. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.184 . https://aclanthology.org/2020.acl-main.184/ · DOI
- Zhou H, Huang M, Liu Y, Chen W, Zhu X. Earl: Informative knowledge-grounded conversation generation with entity-agnostic representation learning. In: Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2021; pp. 2383–2395. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mugambiwa, T., & Ndlovu, B. (2026) · Journal of Applied Informatics and Computing · doi:10.30871/jaic.v10i1.11900 · Cited by 4
“…verifier pipeline in which one agent plans the diagnostic task, another retrieves targeted evidence, and a speciality specific approach promotes sophisticated stepwise clinical reasoning over straightforward question answering, and directly supports how clinicians assess competing hypotheses[26].”
Explainability of decoder-only clinical large language models: A scoping review
Mishra, N., Abu-Hanna, A., & Calixto, I. (2026) · Artificial Intelligence in Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2026.103501
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, M., Shen, Y., Zhao, B., Zhou, X., Sun, L., & Liu, X.
- Affiliations
- Tongji University (CN)
- Southeast University (CN)
- Central South University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Xing
- Venue
- Health Information Science and Systems
- Published
- 2025-09-30
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 62-62
- ISSN
- 2047-2501 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC12484511
- OpenAlex
- W4414645631
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3
- FWCI
- 0.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Licence
- Locations
- Health Information Science and Systems (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Key Technologies Research and Development Program (2023YFC2506900)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (62276063, U23B2057, 62176185)
- Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20221457)
- Natural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality (L247008)
- Undergraduate education and teaching reform research project of Central South University (2024jy154)
- China International Medical Exchange Foundation (2017-24-2421)
- MOE (China) Research Innovation Team on Design-Driven High-Quality Urban Development (20242717)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- large language models, anesthesiology, clinical decision support, knowledge graphs, UMLS, chain-of-thought prompting, post-hoc explanation, hybrid retrieval, token efficiency
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review