ArticleBiomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud2025
Artificial intelligence-driven clinical guideline recommendations in maternal care: How trustworthy are they?
Article in Biomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedical staff often face difficulties in consulting and applying clinical guidelines in practice. Large language models, especially when combined with retrieval-augmented generation, may help overcome these challenges by producing context-specific outputs with improved adherence to medical guidelines.
objectivesTo assess the performance of commercial large language models in answering maternal health questions within retrieval-augmented generation systems, using both human and automated evaluation metrics. MATERIAL AND
methodsA controlled experiment was designed to obtain accurate, consistent answers from a retrieval-augmented generation system based on Colombian maternal care guidelines. A physician formulated ten questions and defined the groundtruth answers. Various large language models were tested with a standardized prompt and evaluated through binary answer-concept ranking and retrieval-augmented generation assessment, metrics, judged by two independent large language models.
resultsGenerative pre-trained transformer 3.5 (GPT-3.5) achieved the highest physicianassessed accuracy (0.90). Claude 3.5 obtained the top faithfulness score (0.78) under GPT-4.o evaluation, while Mistral ranked highest (0.84) under Claude 3.5 evaluation. Regarding answer relevance, GPT-3.5 scored highest across both judges (0.94 and 0.86).
conclusionsIntegrating retrieval-augmented generation into obstetric care has the potential to enhance evidence-based practices and improve patient outcomes. However, rigorous validation of accuracy and context-specific reliability is essential before clinical deployment. The findings of this study indicate that large-scale models (e.g., GPT-3.5, Claude, Llama 70B) consistently outperform lighter models such as Llama 8B.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.