Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39166170›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

Prompt engineering with a large language model to assist providers in responding to patient inquiries: a real-time implementation in the electronic health record.

Majid Afshar, Yanjun Gao, Graham Wills, Jason Wang, Matthew M Churpek, Christa J Westenberger, David T Kunstman, Joel E Gordon, Cherodeep Goswami, Frank J Liao and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Definition of Terms.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Majid AfsharDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53792, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6368-4652
Yanjun GaoDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53792, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9341-7360
Graham WillsInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Jason WangDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Matthew M ChurpekDepartment of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Christa J WestenbergerInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
David T KunstmanInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Joel E GordonInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Cherodeep GoswamiInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Frank J LiaoInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.
Brian PattersonInformation Systems and Informatics, University of Wisconsin Health System, Madison, WI 53792, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4584-3808

Funding

Developing and Evaluating Multi-Modal Clinical Diagnostic Reasoning Models for Automated Diagnosis GenerationR00LM014308 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI Yanjun Gao · 2024 to 2026
$726k
NLM NIH HHS R00 LM014308
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Large language models (LLMs) can assist providers in drafting responses to patient inquiries. We examined a prompt engineering strategy to draft responses for providers in the electronic health record. The aim was to evaluate the change in usability after prompt engineering. Materials and Methods: A pre-post study over 8 months was conducted across 27 providers. The primary outcome was the provider use of LLM-generated messages from Generative Pre-Trained Transformer 4 (GPT-4) in a mixed-effects model, and the secondary outcome was provider sentiment analysis. Results: Of the 7605 messages generated, 17.5% ( Discussion: The improvement in sentiment with prompt engineering suggests better content quality, but the initial decrease in usage highlights the need for integration with human factors design. Conclusion: Future studies should explore strategies for optimizing the integration of LLMs into the provider workflow to maximize both usability and effectiveness.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceelectronic health recordlarge language modelsprompt engineeringsentiment analysis

Identifiers

PMID39166170
PMCPMC11335368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.