ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Clinical large language model centered on electronic medical records.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the quest to enhance medical consultation, our study introduces AI4Doctor, a sophisticated large-language model (LLM) tailored for the clinical domain. At the heart of AI4Doctor is an innovative integration strategy that synergizes distilled data extracted from electronic medical records (EMR) with empirical insights gathered from practicing physicians during the supervised fine-tuning. Although existing platforms offer informative responses, they fall short of replicating the nuanced decision-making processes of medical professionals, particularly in complex, integrative diagnostic scenarios. Motivated by the need to create a realistic medical practice environment, we propose that a combination of direct knowledge transfer from seasoned doctors and the strategic use of EMR can augment the abilities of LLM, enabling it to more closely mimic the clinical acumen of healthcare practitioners. To navigate the complexities of merging diverse instructional sources, we employ a curriculum learning approach during the fine-tuning process. Moreover, we advance our model's performance by developing a reward system that incentivizes the alignment of the LLM's outputs with the valuable attributes inherent in both doctors' expertise, including diagnostic priors, risk thresholds, and heuristic saliencies accumulated from practice and EMR data. This is achieved through a novel reinforcement-learning approach. Besides, we introduce a new benchmark involving a comparative evaluation. We utilize a subjective evaluation system wherein experts critically assess the responses from a professional perspective as well. Our research underscores the potential of this hybrid model to serve as a robust tool in medical consultations, bridging the gap between artificial intelligence and real-world clinical practice.
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.