Cited by 48Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMachine Learning in HealthcareTopic Modeling

Evaluating and Enhancing Large Language Models’ Performance in Domain-Specific Medicine: Development and Usability Study With DocOA

Open access
Chen, Xi, Wang, Li, You, MingKe, Liu, WeiZhi, Fu, Yu, Xu, Jie, Zhang, Shaoting, Chen, Gang +2 more·2024·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: The efficacy of large language models (LLMs) in domain-specific medicine, particularly for managing complex diseases such as osteoarthritis (OA), remains largely unexplored. Objective: This study focused on evaluating and enhancing the clinical capabilities and explainability of LLMs in specific domains, using OA management as a case study. Methods: A domain-specific benchmark framework was developed to evaluate LLMs across a spectrum from domain-specific knowledge to clinical applications in real-world clinical scenarios. DocOA, a specialized LLM designed for OA management integrating retrieval-augmented generation and instructional prompts, was developed. It can identify the clinical evidence upon which its answers are based through retrieval-augmented generation, thereby demonstrating the explainability of those answers. The study compared the performance of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and a specialized assistant, DocOA, using objective and human evaluations. Results: Results showed that general LLMs such as GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were less effective in the specialized domain of OA management, particularly in providing personalized treatment recommendations. However, DocOA showed significant improvements. Conclusions: This study introduces a novel benchmark framework that assesses the domain-specific abilities of LLMs in multiple aspects, highlights the limitations of generalized LLMs in clinical contexts, and demonstrates the potential of tailored approaches for developing domain-specific medical LLMs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/58158

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Prior research indicates that although agents can assume specific roles, their fundamental abilities may be insufficient in the domain-specific knowledge and skills required to function optimally as clinical specialists in complex clinical tasks.

    “This observation is consistent with prior research indicating that although agents can assume specific roles, their fundamental abilities may be insufficient in the domain-specific knowledge and skills require to function optimally as clinical specialists in complex clinical task26,27.”
  • In the review, twenty studies relied exclusively on closed-source models.

    “In our review, twenty studies relied exclusively on closed-source models [62,63,79,89,105,118]”
  • Some explanations cite specific, retrievable evidence, e.g. RAG-grounded source citations or knowledge-graph paths, enabling independent verification.

    “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].”
  • Retrieval-Augmented Generation can, in principle, ground explanations on retrieved sources, enabling verification against clinical guidelines.

    “RetrievalAugmented Generation (RAG) [26] can, in principle, ground explanations on retrieved sources, enabling verification against clinical guidelines [63,94].”
  • Integration with external knowledge sources has emerged as a strategy to ground model outputs in verifiable medical knowledge.

    “Integration with external knowledge sources, including clinical guidelines [63] and medical knowledge graphs [111], has emerged as a strategy to ground model outputs in verifiable medical knowledge.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [12]Lewis P Perez E Piktus A Petroni F Karpukhin V Goyal N Küttler H Lewis M Yih W Rocktäschel T Riedel S Kiela D Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive NLP tasks NeurIPS 2020 1 16
  2. [14]Health N.I.F. Excellence C Osteoarthritis in Over 16s: Diagnosis and Management 2022 France NICE 36745715
  3. [16]Guideline for the Management of Knee and hip Osteoarthritis, 2nd edition 2018 Australia The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners
  4. [19]Chen J Lin H Han X Sun L Benchmarking large language models in retrieval-augmented generation AAAI 2023 17754 17762

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, X., Wang, L., You, M., Liu, W., Fu, Y., Xu, J., Zhang, S., Chen, G., Li, K., & Li, J.
Affiliations
  • Sichuan University (CN)
  • Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CN)
Corresponding author
Li, Jian
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2024-07-22
Volume
26
Pages
e58158
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4399327441
Cited by
48
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 3
FWCI
4.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
large language models, osteoarthritis management, retrieval-augmented generation, explainability, personalized treatment recommendations, LLM benchmarking, GPT-4, GPT-3.5, clinical decision support, instructional prompts
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Humans, Osteoarthritis

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