Retrieval-Augmented Guardrails for AI-Drafted Patient-Portal Messages: Error Taxonomy Construction and Large-Scale Evaluation.

Q2 Computer Science
Wenyuan Chen, Fateme Nateghi Haredasht, Kameron C Black, François Grolleau, Emily Alsentzer, Jonathan H Chen, Stephen P Ma
{"title":"Retrieval-Augmented Guardrails for AI-Drafted Patient-Portal Messages: Error Taxonomy Construction and Large-Scale Evaluation.","authors":"Wenyuan Chen, Fateme Nateghi Haredasht, Kameron C Black, François Grolleau, Emily Alsentzer, Jonathan H Chen, Stephen P Ma","doi":"10.1142/9789819824755_0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Asynchronous patient-clinician messaging via EHR portals is a growing source of clinician workload, prompting interest in large language models (LLMs) to assist with draft responses. However, LLM outputs may contain clinical inaccuracies, omissions, or tone mismatches, making robust evaluation essential. Our contributions are threefold: (1) we introduce a clinically grounded error ontology comprising 5 domains and 59 granular error codes, developed through inductive coding and expert adjudication; (2) we develop a Retrieval-Augmented Error Checking (RAEC) pipeline that leverages semantically similar historical message-response pairs to improve judgment quality; and (3) we provide a two-stage prompting architecture using DSPy to enable scalable, interpretable, and hierarchical error detection. Our approach assesses the quality of drafts both in isolation and with reference to similar past message-response pairs retrieved from institutional archives. Using a two-stage DSPy pipeline, we compared baseline and reference-enhanced evaluations on over 1,500 patient messages. Retrieval context improved error identification in domains such as clinical completeness and workflow appropriateness. Human validation on 100 messages demonstrated superior agreement (concordance = 50% vs. 33%) and performance (F1 = 0.500 vs. 0.256) of context-enhanced labels vs. baseline, supporting the use of our RAEC pipeline as AI guardrails for patient messaging.</p>","PeriodicalId":34954,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing","volume":"31 ","pages":"189-204"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/9789819824755_0014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Computer Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Asynchronous patient-clinician messaging via EHR portals is a growing source of clinician workload, prompting interest in large language models (LLMs) to assist with draft responses. However, LLM outputs may contain clinical inaccuracies, omissions, or tone mismatches, making robust evaluation essential. Our contributions are threefold: (1) we introduce a clinically grounded error ontology comprising 5 domains and 59 granular error codes, developed through inductive coding and expert adjudication; (2) we develop a Retrieval-Augmented Error Checking (RAEC) pipeline that leverages semantically similar historical message-response pairs to improve judgment quality; and (3) we provide a two-stage prompting architecture using DSPy to enable scalable, interpretable, and hierarchical error detection. Our approach assesses the quality of drafts both in isolation and with reference to similar past message-response pairs retrieved from institutional archives. Using a two-stage DSPy pipeline, we compared baseline and reference-enhanced evaluations on over 1,500 patient messages. Retrieval context improved error identification in domains such as clinical completeness and workflow appropriateness. Human validation on 100 messages demonstrated superior agreement (concordance = 50% vs. 33%) and performance (F1 = 0.500 vs. 0.256) of context-enhanced labels vs. baseline, supporting the use of our RAEC pipeline as AI guardrails for patient messaging.

人工智能起草的患者门户信息的检索增强护栏:错误分类构建和大规模评估。
通过EHR门户的异步患者-临床医生消息传递是临床医生工作量的一个日益增长的来源,促使人们对大型语言模型(llm)的兴趣,以协助起草答复。然而,法学硕士输出可能包含临床不准确,遗漏或音调不匹配,使稳健的评估必不可少。我们的贡献有三个方面:(1)我们引入了一个基于临床的错误本体,包括5个域和59个颗粒错误代码,通过归纳编码和专家裁决开发;(2)我们开发了一个检索增强错误检查(RAEC)管道,利用语义相似的历史消息-响应对来提高判断质量;(3)我们提供了一个使用DSPy的两阶段提示架构,以实现可扩展、可解释和分层的错误检测。我们的方法既可以单独评估草稿的质量,也可以参考从机构档案中检索到的类似的过去消息-响应对。使用两阶段DSPy管道,我们比较了超过1500例患者信息的基线和参考增强评估。检索上下文改进了诸如临床完整性和工作流程适当性等领域的错误识别。对100条消息的人工验证表明,上下文增强标签与基线相比具有更好的一致性(一致性= 50%对33%)和性能(F1 = 0.500对0.256),支持使用我们的RAEC管道作为患者消息传递的AI护栏。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书