Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41453288›Full record

ArticleInternational dental journal2026

Evaluating Retrieval-Augmented Generation-Large Language Models for Infective Endocarditis Prophylaxis: Clinical Accuracy and Efficiency.

Paak Rewthamrongsris, Vivat Thongchotchat, Jirayu Burapacheep, Vorapat Trachoo, Zohaib Khurshid, Thantrira Porntaveetus

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Paak RewthamrongsrisDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Dentistry, Center of Artificial Intelligence and Innovation (CAII), Center of Excellence for Dental Stem Cell Biology, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Vivat ThongchotchatCenter of Excellence in Precision Medicine and Digital Health, Department of Physiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Jirayu BurapacheepStanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Vorapat TrachooDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Zohaib KhurshidDepartment of Prosthodontics and Dental Implantology, College of Dentistry, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; FutureDent Digital Center, Chulalongkorn University Implant and Esthetic Center (CUIE), Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thantrira PorntaveetusCenter of Excellence in Precision Medicine and Digital Health, Department of Physiology, Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; FutureDent Digital Center, Chulalongkorn University Implant and Esthetic Center (CUIE), Faculty of Dentistry, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand; Clinic of General-, Special Care and Geriatric Dentistry, Center for Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Electronic address: thantrira.porntaveetus@zzm.uzh.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND

aimsThe use of large language models (LLMs) in healthcare is expanding. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) addresses key LLM limitations by grounding responses in domain-specific, up-to-date information. This study evaluated RAG-augmented LLMs for infective endocarditis (IE) prophylaxis in dental procedures, comparing their performance with non-RAG models assessed in our previous publication using the same question set. A pilot study also explored the utility of an LLM as a clinical decision support tool.

methodsAn established IE prophylaxis question set from previous research was used to ensure comparability. Ten LLMs integrated with RAG were tested using MiniLM L6 v2 embeddings and FAISS to retrieve relevant content from the 2021 American Heart Association IE guideline. Models were evaluated across five independent runs, with and without a preprompt ('You are an experienced dentist'), a prompt-engineering technique used in previous research to improve LLMs accuracy. Three RAG-LLMs were compared to their native (non-RAG) counterparts benchmarked in the previous study. In the pilot study, 10 dental students (5 undergraduate, 5 postgraduate in oral and maxillofacial surgery) completed the questionnaire unaided, then again with assistance from the best performing LLM. Accuracy and task time were measured.

resultsDeepSeek Reasoner achieved the highest mean accuracy (83.6%) without preprompting, while Grok 3 beta reached 90.0% with preprompting. The lowest accuracy was observed for Claude 3.7 Sonnet, at 42.1% without preprompts and 47.1% with preprompts. Preprompting improved performance across all LLMs. RAG's impact on accuracy varied by model. Claude 3.7 Sonnet showed the highest response consistency without preprompting; with preprompting, Claude 3.5 Sonnet and DeepSeek Reasoner matched its performance. DeepSeek Reasoner also had the slowest response time. In the pilot study, LLM support slightly improved postgraduate accuracy, slightly reduced undergraduate accuracy, and significantly increased task time for both.

conclusionWhile RAG and prompting enhance LLM performance, real-world utility in education remains limited. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LLMs with RAG provide rapid and accessible support for clinical decision-making. Nonetheless, their outputs are not always accurate and may not fully reflect evolving medical and dental knowledge. It is crucial that clinicians and students approach these tools with digital literacy and caution, ensuring that professional judgment remains central.

Indexed as

Antibiotic ProphylaxisEndocarditisLanguageClinical CompetenceHumansLarge Language ModelsPilot ProjectsStudents, DentalSurveys and QuestionnairesArtificial intelligenceChatbotsClinical Decision support systemsHealth care accessLarge language modelsRetrieval augmented generation

Identifiers

PMID41453288
PMCPMC12828207

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.