Development and comparative evaluation of knowledge graph–enhanced large language models for domain-specific question answering in nursing

In busy clinical settings, timely access to comprehensive and actionable guideline recommendations can be constrained, motivating interest in large language models (LLMs) as adjunct tools for scalable evidence access and education. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of LLMs in domain-specific question-answering tasks within the nursing field and assess the effectiveness of GraphRAG technology in optimizing LLMs. A knowledge graph was constructed from high-quality clinical practice guidelines for pressure injury management and integrated with two base models—Qwen-turbo-0715 and DeepSeek-V3.1—to develop optimized versions (Qwen-turbo-0715-GraphRAG and DeepSeek-V3.1-GraphRAG). Model performance was compared between 10 non-specialist nurses, 10 specialist nurses, and the LLMs using a self-developed 25-item questionnaire designed with expert input to assess knowledge of pressure injury management. Group differences were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis H test with Bonferroni correction, followed by post hoc pairwise analysis. Average response times were also recorded for each model. Significant differences were observed among non-specialist nurses, specialist nurses, and LLMs (H = 17.662, P-value < 0.001). On this structured, guideline-derived benchmark under the study conditions, the LLM groups obtained higher scores than the nurse groups. The Qwen-turbo-0715-GraphRAG achieved the highest mean score (98.4), followed by DeepSeek-V3.1-GraphRAG (87.2), Qwen-turbo-0715 (86.4), ChatGPT-5 (82.4), and DeepSeek-V3.1 (77.6). GraphRAG optimization was associated with higher benchmark scores, but at the cost of longer response times. Overall, knowledge graph-enhanced LLMs showed more guideline-aligned and source-grounded outputs on this benchmark. However, these improvements were observed within a standardized, guideline-based assessment framework and may not capture the full complexity of clinical expertise. The findings support further evaluation of knowledge graph–enhanced LLMs in larger, more practice-oriented nursing settings and highlight the importance of considering the relative strengths of different base models before clinical application.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Nursing
Published
2026-04-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-026-04647-3
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Development and comparative evaluation of knowledge graph–enhanced large language models for domain-specific question answering in nursing

Hongshuang Chen, Yi Zhou, Shujin Yue, Jiyuan Shi et al.
BMC Nursing
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
article

Development and comparative evaluation of knowledge graph–enhanced large language models for domain-specific question answering in nursing

Hongshuang Chen, Yi Zhou, Shujin Yue, Jiyuan Shi, Wenhua Li, Chenghao Shi, Chunxiang Su, Bin Chen, Kuilin Sang, Chao Sun, Yinqin Zhong, Zheng Li, Xiangdi Liu
article en

Abstract

In busy clinical settings, timely access to comprehensive and actionable guideline recommendations can be constrained, motivating interest in large language models (LLMs) as adjunct tools for scalable evidence access and education. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of LLMs in domain-specific question-answering tasks within the nursing field and assess the effectiveness of GraphRAG technology in optimizing LLMs. A knowledge graph was constructed from high-quality clinical practice guidelines for pressure injury management and integrated with two base models—Qwen-turbo-0715 and DeepSeek-V3.1—to develop optimized versions (Qwen-turbo-0715-GraphRAG and DeepSeek-V3.1-GraphRAG). Model performance was compared between 10 non-specialist nurses, 10 specialist nurses, and the LLMs using a self-developed 25-item questionnaire designed with expert input to assess knowledge of pressure injury management. Group differences were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis H test with Bonferroni correction, followed by post hoc pairwise analysis. Average response times were also recorded for each model. Significant differences were observed among non-specialist nurses, specialist nurses, and LLMs (H = 17.662, P-value < 0.001). On this structured, guideline-derived benchmark under the study conditions, the LLM groups obtained higher scores than the nurse groups. The Qwen-turbo-0715-GraphRAG achieved the highest mean score (98.4), followed by DeepSeek-V3.1-GraphRAG (87.2), Qwen-turbo-0715 (86.4), ChatGPT-5 (82.4), and DeepSeek-V3.1 (77.6). GraphRAG optimization was associated with higher benchmark scores, but at the cost of longer response times. Overall, knowledge graph-enhanced LLMs showed more guideline-aligned and source-grounded outputs on this benchmark. However, these improvements were observed within a standardized, guideline-based assessment framework and may not capture the full complexity of clinical expertise. The findings support further evaluation of knowledge graph–enhanced LLMs in larger, more practice-oriented nursing settings and highlight the importance of considering the relative strengths of different base models before clinical application.

BMC Nursing
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (CN), Beijing University of Chinese Medicine (CN), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College (CN), Peking University (CN), Peking Union Medical College Hospital (CN), Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CN), Peking University Third Hospital (CN), Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University (CN), Shenzhen Pingle Orthopedic Hospital (CN)
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.