Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Medicine: A Scoping Review of Technical Implementations, Clinical Applications, and Ethical Considerations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.05901v2
• Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 01:25:19 GMT
• Title: Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Medicine: A Scoping Review of Technical Implementations, Clinical Applications, and Ethical Considerations
• Authors: Rui Yang, Matthew Yu Heng Wong, Huitao Li, Xin Li, Wentao Zhu, Jingchi Liao, Kunyu Yu, Jonathan Chong Kai Liew, Weihao Xuan, Yingjian Chen, Yuhe Ke, Jasmine Chiat Ling Ong, Douglas Teodoro, Chuan Hong, Daniel Shi Wei Ting, Nan Liu,
• Abstract summary: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) technologies show potential to enhance their clinical applicability.<n>This study reviewed RAG applications in medicine.
• Score: 14.664301156752778
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid growth of medical knowledge and increasing complexity of clinical practice pose challenges. In this context, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated value; however, inherent limitations remain. Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) technologies show potential to enhance their clinical applicability. This study reviewed RAG applications in medicine. We found that research primarily relied on publicly available data, with limited application in private data. For retrieval, approaches commonly relied on English-centric embedding models, while LLMs were mostly generic, with limited use of medical-specific LLMs. For evaluation, automated metrics evaluated generation quality and task performance, whereas human evaluation focused on accuracy, completeness, relevance, and fluency, with insufficient attention to bias and safety. RAG applications were concentrated on question answering, report generation, text summarization, and information extraction. Overall, medical RAG remains at an early stage, requiring advances in clinical validation, cross-linguistic adaptation, and support for low-resource settings to enable trustworthy and responsible global use.

Related papers

• Simulating Viva Voce Examinations to Evaluate Clinical Reasoning in Large Language Models [51.91760712805404]
  We introduce VivaBench, a benchmark for evaluating sequential clinical reasoning in large language models (LLMs)<n>Our dataset consists of 1762 physician-curated clinical vignettes structured as interactive scenarios that simulate a (oral) examination in medical training.<n>Our analysis identified several failure modes that mirror common cognitive errors in clinical practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-11T16:24:35Z)
• Medical Reasoning in the Era of LLMs: A Systematic Review of Enhancement Techniques and Applications [59.721265428780946]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) in medicine have enabled impressive capabilities, yet a critical gap remains in their ability to perform systematic, transparent, and verifiable reasoning.<n>This paper provides the first systematic review of this emerging field.<n>We propose a taxonomy of reasoning enhancement techniques, categorized into training-time strategies and test-time mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T14:41:31Z)
• Evaluating LLMs in Medicine: A Call for Rigor, Transparency [2.2445597370194834]
  Methods: Widely-used benchmark datasets, including MedQA, MedMCQA, PubMedQA, and MMLU, were reviewed for their rigor, transparency, and relevance to clinical scenarios.<n>Alternatives, such as challenge questions in medical journals, were also analyzed to identify their potential as unbiased evaluation tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T16:09:25Z)
• Quantifying the Reasoning Abilities of LLMs on Real-world Clinical Cases [48.87360916431396]
  We introduce MedR-Bench, a benchmarking dataset of 1,453 structured patient cases, annotated with reasoning references.<n>We propose a framework encompassing three critical examination recommendation, diagnostic decision-making, and treatment planning, simulating the entire patient care journey.<n>Using this benchmark, we evaluate five state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs, including DeepSeek-R1, OpenAI-o3-mini, and Gemini-2.0-Flash Thinking, etc.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T18:35:39Z)
• Systematic Literature Review on Clinical Trial Eligibility Matching [0.24554686192257422]
  Review highlights how explainable AI and standardized ontology can bolster clinician trust and broaden adoption.<n>Further research into advanced semantic and temporal representations, expanded data integration, and rigorous prospective evaluations is necessary to fully realize the transformative potential of NLP in clinical trial recruitment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-02T11:45:50Z)
• Comprehensive and Practical Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems for Medical Question Answering [70.44269982045415]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as a promising approach to enhance the performance of large language models (LLMs) We introduce Medical Retrieval-Augmented Generation Benchmark (MedRGB) that provides various supplementary elements to four medical QA datasets. Our experimental results reveals current models' limited ability to handle noise and misinformation in the retrieved documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-14T06:19:18Z)
• Towards Reliable Medical Question Answering: Techniques and Challenges in Mitigating Hallucinations in Language Models [1.03590082373586]
  This paper conducts a scoping study of existing techniques for mitigating hallucinations in knowledge-based task in general and especially for medical domains. Key methods covered in the paper include Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)-based techniques, iterative feedback loops, supervised fine-tuning, and prompt engineering. These techniques, while promising in general contexts, require further adaptation and optimization for the medical domain due to its unique demands for up-to-date, specialized knowledge and strict adherence to medical guidelines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-25T11:09:15Z)
• GMAI-MMBench: A Comprehensive Multimodal Evaluation Benchmark Towards General Medical AI [67.09501109871351]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) are capable of handling diverse data types such as imaging, text, and physiological signals. GMAI-MMBench is the most comprehensive general medical AI benchmark with well-categorized data structure and multi-perceptual granularity to date. It is constructed from 284 datasets across 38 medical image modalities, 18 clinical-related tasks, 18 departments, and 4 perceptual granularities in a Visual Question Answering (VQA) format.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T17:59:21Z)
• A Comprehensive Survey on Evaluating Large Language Model Applications in the Medical Industry [2.1717945745027425]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have evolved significantly, impacting various industries with their advanced capabilities in language understanding and generation. This comprehensive survey delineates the extensive application and requisite evaluation of LLMs within healthcare. Our survey is structured to provide an in-depth analysis of LLM applications across clinical settings, medical text data processing, research, education, and public health awareness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-24T09:55:24Z)
• Natural Language Programming in Medicine: Administering Evidence Based Clinical Workflows with Autonomous Agents Powered by Generative Large Language Models [29.05425041393475]
  Generative Large Language Models (LLMs) hold significant promise in healthcare. This study assessed the potential of LLMs to function as autonomous agents in a simulated tertiary care medical center.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-05T15:09:57Z)
• Self-Verification Improves Few-Shot Clinical Information Extraction [73.6905567014859]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to accelerate clinical curation via few-shot in-context learning. They still struggle with issues regarding accuracy and interpretability, especially in mission-critical domains such as health. Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using self-verification, which leverages the LLM to provide provenance for its own extraction and check its own outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T22:05:11Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.