ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
A medically grounded LLM agent-based tool to detect patient safety events in medical records: Identifying patient safety events with large language models.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have shown incredible promise in medicine. While LLMs may be particularly useful in areas requiring extensive review of clinical records, their use remains limited due to their tendency to hallucinate and fabricate information. Hallucination issues, as well as their consequences, are exacerbated in low-probability, high-stakes scenarios such as rare adverse safety events or medical errors. We present SAFE-AI (Structured and Automated Framework for Explainable AI), a novel method for clinical decision making that combines the strengths of clinical expert knowledge with LLMs in an ontology-driven model that minimizes hallucinations using strict rules. We test this method to identify medication errors in medical charts. We collected a sample of 18,402 lines of clinical information from 300 EMS clinical charts that were independently dually reviewed by two expert physicians for epinephrine adverse safety events (ASEs), with 96% inter-rater agreement. We tested SAFE-AI against these labels, achieving human-like performance in detecting epinephrine overdoses with 97.9% accuracy, and 91.6% accuracy in identifying delays in epinephrine administration, greatly outperforming baseline LLMs models. Notably, some disagreements between clinicians and the model were found to be justifiable differences in judgment rather than errors. SAFE-AI presents a novel approach for clinical AI applications that addresses two key limitations of current machine learning methods: 1) over-reliance on probabilistic pattern recognition instead of established medical knowledge, and 2) perpetuation of biases present in training data. This framework is easily adaptable to a range of clinical applications, paving the way for provable and trustworthy AI in medicine.
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.