Evidence Hub

MMRAG: multi-mode retrieval-augmented generation with large language models for biomedical in-context learning

Zhan Z, Wang J, Zhou S, Deng J, Zhang R

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2025

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To optimize in-context learning in biomedical natural language processing by improving example selection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We introduce a novel multi-mode retrieval-augmented generation (MMRAG) framework, which integrates 4 retrieval strategies: (1) Random Mode, selecting examples arbitrarily; (2) Top Mode, retrieving the most relevant examples based on similarity; (3) Diversity Mode, ensuring variation in selected examples; and (4) Class Mode, selecting category-representative examples. This study evaluates MMRAG on 3 core biomedical NLP tasks: Named Entity Recognition (NER), Relation Extraction (RE), and Text Classification (TC). The datasets used include BC2GM for gene and protein mention recognition (NER), DDI for drug-drug interaction extraction (RE), GIT for general biomedical information extraction (RE), and HealthAdvice for health-related text classification (TC). The framework is tested with 2 large language models (Llama-2-7B and Llama-3-8B) and 3 retrievers (Contriever, MedCPT, and BGE-Large) to assess performance across different retrieval strategies.

RESULTS: The results from the Random Mode indicate that providing more examples in the prompt improves the model's generation performance. Meanwhile, Top Mode and Diversity Mode significantly outperform Random Mode on the RE (DDI) task, achieving an F1 score of 0.9669-a 26.4% improvement. Among the 3 retrievers tested, Contriever outperformed the other 2 in a greater number of experiments.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a experimental / empirical study, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free