① Question quality

Reasonable vs. Unreasonable Questions

DeepEvidence needs a complete question sentence to work. A standalone medical term (a disease name, drug name, or lab marker) is not a question — the system can't infer what you actually need from it.

#Example inputRatingWhy
01

Aspirin

✗ PoorOnly a single drug name — not a question at all. The AI can't tell whether you want the dose, indications, side effects, or something else.
02

Can aspirin be used together with a PD-1 drug?

✓ GoodNames two drugs and states the core question (interaction), so the system can retrieve drug-interaction literature.
03

The patient is taking aspirin and is scheduled for surgery next week — when should it be stopped?

✓ GoodProvides the clinical context (pre-op) and specific medication use, with a clear goal (timing of discontinuation), helping return a guideline-based answer.
04

Diabetes

✗ PoorA disease name carries no question by itself. Diagnosis? Treatment? Complications? The system can't guess.
05

In a patient with type 2 diabetes and heart failure, should an SGLT-2 inhibitor be preferred over metformin?

✓ GoodSpecifies the patient characteristics (type 2 diabetes + heart failure), the drugs compared, and the decision question (preference) — a standard clinical-question format.
06

Troponin

✗ PoorA single lab-marker name. Normal range? Significance of an elevation? How to trend it? You need to state your actual question.
07

A patient with acute chest pain has a normal initial troponin, but a repeat at 3 hours is elevated — do they need the cath lab immediately?

✓ GoodDescribes the full clinical scenario and the dynamic lab change, and poses a decision question, so the system can accurately match NSTEMI-related guidelines.

Core principle: a noun is not a question — a sentence is

Each input should include: who (patient characteristics) · what situation (context / medications / labs) · the specific question (what you actually want to know).

② Question clarity

Clear vs. Vague Questions

Even a complete sentence can be too vague if it lacks key information. A clear question should include context such as patient age, comorbidities, and specific values, helping the system locate the most relevant evidence.

Vague questions (answers will be generic)

❓ How do I take aspirin?

Missing: patient age, indication (primary/secondary prevention? anti-inflammatory?), comorbidities, current medications.
The system can only give a generic dose range with little clinical utility.

❓ How do I choose an antibiotic?

Site of infection? Pathogen? Inpatient or outpatient? Beta-lactam allergy? Without this information, no useful recommendation is possible.

❓ How is hypertension treated?

Missing the blood-pressure value, cardiovascular risk stratification, comorbidities (diabetes, CKD, heart failure?), and current medications. The answer will be a textbook generality.

Clear questions (the system can give precise, evidence-based answers)

✅ A 65-year-old on aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention — what is the recommended dose?

Age specifiedIndication specified (secondary prevention)Focused question (dose)

✅ A 65-year-old on aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention with chronic kidney disease (eGFR 45 mL/min/1.73m²) — does the dose need adjusting?

Age specifiedComorbidity + specific valueFocused question (dose adjustment)

✅ Community-acquired pneumonia, inpatient, PORT class III, no penicillin allergy — what is the first-line antibacterial regimen?

Site specifiedSeverity gradedAllergy history specified

PICO framework — the gold standard for building clear clinical questions

P

Patient

Patient characteristics: age, sex,
comorbidities, lab values

I

Intervention

Intervention: drug, procedure,
dose, duration

C

Comparison

Comparison (optional):
another drug or no treatment

O

Outcome

Outcome: survival,
adverse effects, dose adjustment

③ vs. general AI

DeepEvidence ≠ a general LLM

Please don't use DeepEvidence the way you'd use general AI like ChatGPT or Ernie Bot. Their design goals, mechanics, and best-fit scenarios are fundamentally different.

No role-setting needed

You are a professor-level medical expert, please help me…
✓ Just ask: a 65-year-old, ASA III, with coronary artery disease, scheduled for knee replacement…

DeepEvidence has the evidence-based knowledge system built in; role prompts neither improve nor affect answer quality — they're just unnecessary clutter.

No internet · no web-wide literature search

Search PubMed for the latest literature on…
✓ Just ask your clinical question; the system retrieves from a high-quality knowledge base

The system retrieves only from a curated, high-quality medical-literature knowledge base, deliberately avoiding low-quality sources to keep wrong information out of answers.

Won't fabricate references (hallucinations)

✗ General LLMs may generate DOIs / authors / journal names that look real but don't exist
✓ DeepEvidence cites only literature and guidelines that actually exist in the knowledge base

Built on a RAG architecture, answers come from real literature snippets, not from the model's invention.

Focused on medicine · not general chat

✗ Write a poem about the heart / draft a meeting invitation for me…
✓ Professional questions: clinical decisions, drug lookups, diagnostic reasoning, medical knowledge

Non-medical questions reduce efficiency and won't match a dedicated general-purpose model in quality.

Feature comparison at a glance
DimensionGeneral LLM
(e.g. ChatGPT)
DeepEvidence
Knowledge sourceTraining data (fixed cutoff)Real-time retrieval from medical-literature databases
Role-setting neededSometimes helps❌ No effect — not needed
Web searchSome versions support it❌ No internet (anti-hallucination design)
CitationsMay be fabricated✅ Traceable to real literature
Clinical diagnostic reasoningMediocre, lacks evidence depth✅ Purpose-optimized
Medical-knowledge quality controlNo filtering✅ High-quality sources only
General writing/chat✅ Strong❌ Not its purpose
④ Capabilities

What can DeepEvidence do?

You can ask directly in all of the following areas — no need to state your role or background.

Clinical & differential diagnosis

Enter symptoms, signs, and lab results to get a systematic differential-diagnosis list and reasoning.

e.g. A 38-year-old woman with joint pain, a malar rash, and positive ANA — what should be in the differential?

Drug use & dosing

Indications, contraindications, dose adjustment in hepatic/renal impairment, and the optimal route and timing.

e.g. For a kidney-transplant patient on tacrolimus, how do I adjust the dose based on blood levels?

Drug interactions

Interaction mechanisms, clinical significance, and management advice when combining drugs.

e.g. When warfarin is combined with fluconazole, how does PT/INR change?

Treatment plans & guidelines

First/second-line treatment per the latest guidelines, and stepwise strategies.

e.g. What is the standard pharmacotherapy for a patient with HFrEF (EF 35%)?

Medical scales & scoring

Interpretation of scores such as CHA₂DS₂-VASc, MELD, APACHE, Wells, and CURB-65.

e.g. Does an atrial-fibrillation patient with a CHA₂DS₂-VASc score of 3 need anticoagulation?

Rare & genetic diseases

Diagnostic criteria, inheritance patterns, genetic-testing advice, and current treatments for rare diseases.

e.g. A child presents with episodic ataxia — which rare diseases should be considered?

Drug side effects & toxicity

Common/rare adverse reactions, toxicity monitoring, and management workflows.

e.g. How is immune-checkpoint-inhibitor-induced pneumonitis graded and managed?

Interpreting tests & investigations

Clinical significance, reference ranges, influencing factors, and next steps for lab markers.

e.g. BNP is markedly elevated but the echocardiogram is normal — what should be considered?

Medical history & basic mechanisms

Disease mechanisms, pathophysiology, and medical-history background.

e.g. What were the main contributions of the Framingham study to cardiovascular disease prevention?

⑤ Tips

Advanced tips: get more precise answers

1

Give specific values, not descriptive language

✗ Poor kidney function

✓ eGFR 28 mL/min/1.73m² (CKD stage 4)

2

List all current medications

✗ The patient is on a few drugs

✓ Currently taking: warfarin 3 mg/d, digoxin 0.125 mg/d, furosemide 20 mg/d

3

State your decision goal clearly

✗ About this patient…

✓ I need to decide: start anticoagulation now, or wait for repeat testing?

4

Break complex questions into follow-ups

When a question has multiple decision points, ask the main one first, then follow up after you get the answer.

✓ First: what is the first-line drug? → Then: how is its dose adjusted in renal impairment?

5

Note special-population status

Pregnancy, lactation, elderly (>80), children, immunosuppression, etc. all affect the recommendation.

✓ The patient is 28 weeks pregnant with hyperthyroidism — which antithyroid drugs can be used?

6

Note region / resource setting (optional)

If you need Chinese guidelines, or resources are limited at a primary hospital, say so.

✓ At a primary hospital with no CRRT, how should this patient's acute kidney failure be managed?

⑥ Common pitfalls

Common pitfalls when using it

Pitfall 1: treating DeepEvidence like a search engine

A search engine returns a list of links; DeepEvidence returns a synthesized, evidence-based answer. Use complete questions, not keyword searches.

Pitfall 2: expecting it to replace clinical judgment

DeepEvidence provides evidence-based reference; the final clinical decision must be made by a licensed physician considering the specific patient. The system bears no medical liability.

Pitfall 3: thinking longer prompts are better

You don't need a lot of preamble — just include the key patient information plus a clear question. Two or three sentences are enough for a high-quality answer.

Pitfall 4: using it to generate patient-facing copy

Answers are in professional medical language for physicians, not for copying directly to lay patients. For patient-education materials, use general AI to adapt the language.

Ready to go?

Once you've mastered these tips, DeepEvidence becomes your most reliable evidence-based decision partner.