Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41132171›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

MEGA-RAG: a retrieval-augmented generation framework with multi-evidence guided answer refinement for mitigating hallucinations of LLMs in public health.

Shan Xu, Zhaokun Yan, Chengxiao Dai, Fan Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

4 authors.

Shan XuShanghai Institute of Infectious Disease and Biosecurity, School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Zhaokun YanChina Academy of Information and Communications Technology, Beijing, China.
Chengxiao DaiChina Academy of Information and Communications Technology, Beijing, China.
Fan WuShanghai Institute of Infectious Disease and Biosecurity, School of Public Health, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The increasing adoption of large language models (LLMs) in public health has raised significant concerns about hallucinations-factually inaccurate or misleading outputs that can compromise clinical communication and policy decisions. Methods: We propose a retrieval-augmented generation framework with multi-evidence guided answer refinement (MEGA-RAG), specifically designed to mitigate hallucinations in public health applications. The framework integrates multi-source evidence retrieval (dense retrieval via FAISS, keyword-based retrieval via BM25, and biomedical knowledge graphs), employs a cross-encoder reranker to ensure semantic relevance, and incorporates a discrepancy-aware refinement module to further enhance factual accuracy. Results: Experimental evaluation demonstrates that MEGA-RAG outperforms four baseline models [PubMedBERT, PubMedGPT, standalone LLM, and LLM with standard retrieval-augmented generation (RAG)], achieving a reduction in hallucination rates by over 40%. It also achieves the highest accuracy (0.7913), precision (0.7541), recall (0.8304), and F1 score (0.7904). Discussion: These findings confirm that MEGA-RAG is highly effective in generating factually reliable and medically accurate responses, thereby enhancing the credibility of AI-generated health information for applications in health education, clinical communication, and evidence-based policy development.

Indexed as

HallucinationsInformation Storage and RetrievalLanguagePublic HealthHumansAI in healthcareLLM hallucinationsmedical question answeringpublic healthRAG

Identifiers

PMID41132171
PMCPMC12540348

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.