SentryLine: Evidence-Grounded Question Answering over Evolving Documents in Oncology Care

Across medical specialties, clinical practice is anchored in evidence-based guidelines that codify best studied diagnostic and treatment pathways. These pathways routinely fall short for the long tail of real-world care not covered by guidelines. Most medical large language models (LLMs), however, are trained to encode common, guideline-focused medical knowledge in their parameters. Current evaluations test models primarily on recalling and reasoning with this memorized content, often in multiple-choice settings. Given the fundamental importance of evidence-based reasoning in medicine, it is neither feasible nor reliable to depend on memorization in practice. To address this gap, we introduce OGCaReBench, a free-form retrieval-focused benchmark aimed at evaluating LLMs at answering clinical questions that require going beyond typical guidelines. Extracted from published medical case reports and validated by medical experts, OGCaReBench contains long-form clinical questions requiring free-text answers, providing a systematic framework for assessing open-ended medical reasoning in rare, case-based scenarios. Our experiments reveal that even the best-performing baseline (GPT-5.2) correctly answers only 56% of our benchmark with specialized models only reaching 42%. Augmenting models with retrieved medical articles improves this performance to up to 82% (using GPT-5.2) highlighting the importance of evidence-grounding for real-world medical reasoning tasks. This work thus establishes a foundation for benchmarking and advancing both general-purpose and medical LLMs to produce reliable answers in challenging clinical contexts.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) encode diagnostic criteria, but LLM systems typically retrieve guideline text or absorb it through training rather than execute its rules. We introduce GuideSkill, an external reasoning layer that compiles disease-specific criteria into executable functions returning ordinal diagnostic-support scores. GuideSkill-Zero is initialized from guidelines, while GuideSkill-Evo uses case--diagnosis pairs to refine covered skills and add missing diagnoses. At inference, an LLM proposes a differential diagnosis, grounds the features required by each matched skill, and fuses its ranking with the executed skill scores. Across four benchmarks and four backbones, GuideSkill-Zero improves macro-average accuracy over guideline RAG by 13.45% on average. GuideSkill-Evo achieves the highest macro-average for every backbone, improves over direct inference by 18.49% relatively, and increases gold-label skill coverage from 56.5% to 99.5%. On Qwen3.5-9B, it also exceeds the strongest parameter-update baseline by 11.16% without updating the backbone. Expert evaluation further indicates that GuideSkill produces clinically sound and broadly acceptable skills, suggesting that its initialized and evolved rules are reliable and practically meaningful. These results support executable skills as a model-agnostic mechanism for combining guideline-derived procedures with case-derived diagnostic patterns.

In this work, we propose Oph-Guid-RAG, a multimodal visual RAG system for ophthalmology clinical question answering and decision support. We treat each guideline page as an independent evidence unit and directly retrieve page images, preserving tables, flowcharts, and layout information. We further design a controllable retrieval framework with routing and filtering, which selectively introduces external evidence and reduces noise. The system integrates query decomposition, query rewriting, retrieval, reranking, and multimodal reasoning, and provides traceable outputs with guideline page references. We evaluate our method on HealthBench using a doctor-based scoring protocol. On the hard subset, our approach improves the overall score from 0.2969 to 0.3861 (+0.0892, +30.0%) compared to GPT-5.2, and achieves higher accuracy, improving from 0.5956 to 0.6576 (+0.0620, +10.4%). Compared to GPT-5.4, our method achieves a larger accuracy gain of +0.1289 (+24.4%). These results show that our method is more effective on challenging cases that require precise, evidence-based reasoning. Ablation studies further show that reranking, routing, and retrieval design are critical for stable performance, especially under difficult settings. Overall, we show how combining visionbased retrieval with controllable reasoning can improve evidence grounding and robustness in clinical AI applications,while pointing out that further work is needed to be more complete.