The DOI matches its DataCite record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Clean & Clear: Feasibility of Safe LLM Clinical Guidance
Open accessAbstract
Background: Clinical guidelines are central to safe evidence-based medicine in modern healthcare, providing diagnostic criteria, treatment options and monitoring advice for a wide range of illnesses. LLM-empowered chatbots have shown great promise in Healthcare Q&A tasks, offering the potential to provide quick and accurate responses to medical inquiries. Our main objective was the development and preliminary assessment of an LLM-empowered chatbot software capable of reliably answering clinical guideline questions using University College London Hospital (UCLH) clinical guidelines. Methods: We used the open-weight Llama-3.1-8B LLM to extract relevant information from the UCLH guidelines to answer questions. Our approach highlights the safety and reliability of referencing information over its interpretation and response generation. Seven doctors from the ward assessed the chatbot's performance by comparing its answers to the gold standard. Results: Our chatbot demonstrates promising performance in terms of relevance, with ~73% of its responses rated as very relevant, showcasing a strong understanding of the clinical context. Importantly, our chatbot achieves a recall of 1.00 for extracted guideline lines, substantially minimising the risk of missing critical information. Approximately 78% of responses were rated satisfactory in terms of completeness. A small portion (~14.5%) contained minor unnecessary information, indicating occasional lapses in precision. The chatbot' showed high efficiency, with an average completion time of 10 seconds, compared to 30 seconds for human respondents. Evaluation of clinical reasoning showed that 72% of the chatbot's responses were without flaws. Our chatbot demonstrates significant potential to speed up and improve the process of accessing locally relevant clinical information for healthcare professionals.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
Ive et al.'s study scope was limited to six small guideline documents, which may have biased its recall performance.
“However, the study's scope was limited, focusing only on six small guideline documents, which may have biased its recall performance.”
From Grounding Large Language Models in Clinical Evidence: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Querying UK NICE Clinical Guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Ive et al. (2025)
The Participants section (p. 3) says the evaluation used six selected guidelines, and Tasks (p. 4) reports an average of 47 lines and 950 words per guideline. The Discussion (p. 5) reports 100% recall, but the paper does not say that the number or size of the guidelines may have biased that result. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIve et al.'s system was not a RAG implementation but shared similarities, with the key distinction being its safety-focused design that intentionally omitted the generation step.
“While the system is not a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) implementation, it shares similarities, with the system extracting relevant information in response to a query. The key distinction is the system's safety-focused design, which intentionally omits the 'generation' step found in RAG frameworks.”
From Grounding Large Language Models in Clinical Evidence: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Querying UK NICE Clinical Guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Ive et al. (2025)
Ive et al. (2025) developed a clinical Q&A chatbot for University College London Hospital guidelines using the Llama-3.1-8B model.
“A notable implementation for querying UK guidelines is presented by Ive et al. (2025), who developed a clinical Q&A chatbot for University College London Hospital guidelines using the Llama-3.1-8B model (Dubey et al., 2024).”
From Grounding Large Language Models in Clinical Evidence: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Querying UK NICE Clinical Guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Ive et al. (2025)
Ive et al.'s method proved highly reliable, achieving 100% recall for critical information and avoiding hallucinated responses.
“This method proved highly reliable, achieving 100% recall for critical information and avoiding 'hallucinated responses'.”
From Grounding Large Language Models in Clinical Evidence: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Querying UK NICE Clinical Guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Ive et al. (2025)
Ive et al.'s system was constrained to only extract and display verbatim text from source guidelines rather than generating new sentences, to prevent fabrication.
“To prevent the model from fabricating information, it was uniquely constrained to only extract and display verbatim text from the source guidelines rather than generating new sentences.”
From Grounding Large Language Models in Clinical Evidence: A Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Querying UK NICE Clinical Guidelines (2025) · cites this paper as Ive et al. (2025)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 1
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- [Arnold et al. 2009] Arnold, F. W.; LaJoie, A. S.; Brock, G. N.; Peyrani, P.; Rello, J.; Men´ endez, R.; Lopardo, G.; Torres, A.; Rossi, P.; Ramirez, J. A.; et al. 2009. Improving outcomes in elderly patients with community-acquired pneumonia by adhering to national guidelines: Communityacquired pneumonia organization international cohort study results. Archives of internal medicine 169(16):1515-1524.
- [Coba et al. 2011] Coba, V.; Whitmill, M.; Mooney, R.; Horst, H. M.; Brandt, M.-M.; Digiovine, B.; Mlynarek, M.; McLellan, B.; Boleski, G.; Yang, J.; et al. 2011. Resuscitation bundle compliance in severe sepsis and septic shock: improves survival, is better late than never. Journal of intensive care medicine 26(5):304-313.
- [Colakoglu, Solmaz, and F¨ urst 2025] Colakoglu, G.; Solmaz, G.; and F¨ urst, J. 2025. Problem solved? information extraction design space for layout-rich documents using LLMs. arXiv [cs.CL] .
- [Curtis et al. 2018] Curtis, H. J.; Dennis, J. M.; Shields, B. M.; Walker, A. J.; Bacon, S.; Hattersley, A. T.; Jones, A. G.; and Goldacre, B. 2018. Time trends and geographical variation in prescribing of drugs for diabetes in england from 1998 to 2017. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 20(9):2159-2168.
- [Daniels et al. 2024] Daniels, J.; Robinson, E.; Jenkinson, E.; and Carlton, E. 2024. Perceived barriers and opportunities to improve working conditions and staff retention in emergency departments: a qualitative study. Emergency Medicine Journal 41(4):257-265.
- [Dean et al. 2001] Dean, N. C.; Silver, M. P.; Bateman, K. A.; James, B.; Hadlock, C. J.; and Hale, D. 2001. Decreased mortality after implementation of a treatment guideline for community-acquired pneumonia. The American journal of medicine 110(6):451-457.
- [Dubey et al. 2024] Dubey, A.; Jauhri, A.; Pandey, A.; Kadian, A.; Al-Dahle, A.; Letman, A.; Mathur, A.; Schelten, A.; Yang, A.; Fan, A.; et al. 2024. The llama 3 herd of models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.21783 . · arXiv
- [Freedman et al. 2021] Freedman, S.; Golberstein, E.; Huang, T.-Y.; Satin, D. J.; and Smith, L. B. 2021. Docs with their eyes on the clock? the effect of time pressures on primary care productivity. Journal of health economics 77:102442.
- [Kann et al. 2020] Kann, B. H.; Johnson, S. B.; Aerts, H. J.; Mak, R. H.; and Nguyen, P. L. 2020. Changes in length and complexity of clinical practice guidelines in oncology, 1996-2019. JAMA Network Open 3(3):e200841-e200841.
- [Kresevic et al. 2024] Kresevic, S.; Giuffr` e, M.; Ajcevic, M.; Accardo, A.; Croc` e, L. S.; and Shung, D. L. 2024. Optimization of hepatological clinical guidelines interpretation by large language models: a retrieval augmented generationbased framework. NPJ Digit. Med. 7(1):102.
- [Park et al. 2024] Park, Y.-J.; Pillai, A.; Deng, J.; Guo, E.; Gupta, M.; Paget, M.; and Naugler, C. 2024. Assessing the research landscape and clinical utility of large language models: a scoping review. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 24(1):72.
- [Qumseya et al. 2021] Qumseya, B.; Goddard, A.; Qumseya, A.; Estores, D.; Draganov, P. V.; and Forsmark, C. 2021. Barriers to clinical practice guideline implementation among physicians: a physician survey. International Journal of General Medicine 7591-7598.
- [Rhead et al. 2024] Rhead, R.; Harber-Aschan, L.; Onwumere, J.; Polling, C.; Dorrington, S.; Ehsan, A.; Stevelink, S. A.; Khunti, K.; Mir, G.; Morriss, R.; et al. 2024. Ethnic inequalities among nhs staff in england: workplace experiences during the covid-19 pandemic. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 81(3):113-121.
- [Torjesen 2021] Torjesen, I. 2021. Doctors are under more work pressure than during height of covid-19 pandemic in 2020. BMJ: British Medical Journal (Online) 375.
- [Tsiga et al. 2013] Tsiga, E.; Panagopoulou, E.; Sevdalis, N.; Montgomery, A.; and Benos, A. 2013. The influence of time pressure on adherence to guidelines in primary care: an experimental study. BMJ open 3(4):e002700.
- [Van der Vegt et al. 2020] Van der Vegt, A.; Zuccon, G.; Koopman, B.; and Deacon, A. 2020. How searching under time pressure impacts clinical decision making. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA 108(4):564.
- [VanWagner et al. 2020] VanWagner, L. B.; Holl, J. L.; Montag, S.; Gregory, D.; Connolly, S.; Kosirog, M.; Campbell, P.; Pine, S.; Daud, A.; Finn, D.; et al. 2020. Blood pressure control according to clinical practice guidelines is associated with decreased mortality and cardiovascular events among liver transplant recipients. American Journal of Transplantation 20(3):797-807.
- [Williams et al. 2024] Williams, C. Y.; Miao, B. Y.; Kornblith, A. E.; and Butte, A. J. 2024. Evaluating the use of large language models to provide clinical recommendations in the emergency department. Nature Communications 15(1):8236.
Metadata
- Authors
- Ive, J., Jozsa, F., Jackson, N., Bondaronek, P., Hill, C. S., & Dobson, R.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2503.20953
- OpenAlex
- W4415244739
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
- Keywords
- large language models, clinical guidelines, Llama-3.1-8B, clinical reasoning, medical information retrieval
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