Configurable Clinical Information Extraction with Agentic RAG: What Works, What Breaks, and Why
Authors: Osman Alperen Çinar-Koraş, Marie Bauer, Sameh Khattab, Merlin Engelke, Moon Kim, Stephan Settelmeier, Shigeyasu Sugawara, Fabian Freisleben, +2 more
Abstract
Patient contexts span hundreds of heterogeneous documents and thousands of structured data points, yet the document-level metadata that AI systems need for retrieval and triage is absent or incomplete. Standard retrieval-augmented generation fails on this data, mishandling temporal reasoning, cross-document dependencies, and missing metadata. We deploy ACIE (Agentic Clinical Information Extraction) at University Medicine Essen: an on-premise agentic RAG pipeline that reasons over complete patient contexts and grounds every answer in source passages for clinician verification. We quantify the metadata gap, trace the architectural decisions it shaped, and evaluate extraction alongside an independent retrospective lymphoma registry study, in which nuclear-medicine physicians verify every extracted value against its cited sources. Across 7,326 judgments, clinicians accepted 96.5% of extractions, with per-type acceptance ranging from 80% to 99%.
Conversational nurse-patient transcripts contain actionable observations, but converting these transcripts into structured representations at scale remains challenging. Documentation burden is substantial, with prior studies showing clinicians spend large portions of their workday on documentation and related desk work rather than direct patient care. MEDIQA-SYNUR focuses on observation extraction from conversational nurse-patient transcripts, requiring systems to normalize these narratives into a predefined schema with value-type constraints. We propose a modular retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipeline that uses the training set as an exemplar corpus, combines schema-constrained prompting (full schema vs. pruned candidate schema), deterministic schema-based postprocessing, and a second-pass audit, with two LLM backbones: Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct and GPT-5.2 with corresponding embedding models for RAG. Our best configuration uses GPT-5.2 with full schema, RAG, and a second-pass auditing, achieving 80.36% F1 score. Overall, our results show that RAG consistently improves performance, while the optimal degree of schema constraint depends on the model, and second-pass auditing yields modest additional gains by correcting residual schema-adherence errors.
Retrieval-augmented generation evaluation checks whether model claims are factually grounded in retrieved documents. It does not check whether retrieved evidence is attributed to the correct entity. A clinical RAG response can pass every automated check (zero hallucinations, near-perfect faithfulness, real citations) while presenting drug Y's clinical evidence as evidence about queried drug X. We term this deceptive grounding (DG): a failure invisible to faithfulness, hallucination, and citation checks because every claim is sourced from a real document, about the wrong entity. Using a controlled factorial benchmark across 13 models, we find DG rates spanning 8-87% at peak adversarial conditions. Medical and biomedical fine-tuned models reach up to 86.7%; domain specialization amplifies the failure rather than mitigating it. A controlled ablation identifies the mechanism: removing entity-specific clinical evidence from retrieved documents eliminates entity-attribution failure entirely, shifting all failures to confabulation. The two failure modes respond to the same trigger, taking different paths. Production measurement across 740 drug-disease pairs finds 7.8% overall DG in a deployed RAG system, rising to 13.6% for recently approved drugs. Entity-attribution verification (checking that cited evidence applies to the queried entity) detects DG at 97.0% precision and 98.7% DG recall (IPW-adjusted human gold standard); no existing framework implements it.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is widely employed to mitigate risks such as hallucinations and knowledge obsolescence in medical question answering, yet its predominantly single-round, static retrieval paradigm misaligns with the multi-stage process of clinical reasoning. This compressed workflow induces two structural deficiencies: question-to-query translation often lacks clinically grounded semantic interpretation, and retrieval lacks iterative sufficiency feedback, making it difficult to form reliable evidence chains. We argue that both issues stem from a deeper cause: overloading a single reasoning chain with heterogeneous tasks of interpretation, exploration, and adjudication. The remedy is to reconstruct the workflow via task decoupling and dynamic multi-round exploration. To this end, we propose SEMA-RAG, a Self-Evolving Multi-Agent RAG framework for medical question answering, which assigns these roles to three specialist agents: the Interpreter Agent for clinical schema interpretation, the Explorer Agent for sufficiency-driven self-evolving retrieval, and the Arbiter Agent for evidence adjudication and answer selection. Across five benchmarks and five LLM backbones, SEMA-RAG improves the strongest baseline by +6.46 accuracy points on average, measured per backbone.