the knowledge platform

openevidence prompting playbook (clinicians): 12 prompts that work

prompt patterns that reliably produce usable outputs: evidence tables, guideline alignment, and ‘what would change the answer?’ framing.

The Bottom Line

  • Ask for output formats that force grounding: citations, study summaries, and uncertainty.
  • Use constraints (population, setting, timeframe) to reduce irrelevant retrieval.
  • Always include a ‘limitations’ clause to avoid confident overreach.
The core skill is not ‘prompting’ — it’s structured questioning. You’re trying to force the model into evidence-first behaviour: cite, summarise, and declare uncertainty.
1

Prompt 1 — Evidence table

“Give me a table: Recommendation | Evidence source | Year | Key limitation | Where it applies.”
2

Prompt 2 — Guideline alignment

“Summarise how major guidelines differ on this question and why.”
3

Prompt 3 — What would change the answer

“List the patient factors or setting constraints that would change your recommendation.”
4

Prompt 4 — Counter-evidence search

“Find the strongest counterargument or evidence that would contradict the top conclusion.”
5

Prompt 5 — Practical implementation

“If I had to implement this in a time-pressured setting, what is the minimum safe plan and what are the stop-triggers?”
Practice

Test your knowledge

Apply this concept immediately with a high-yield question block from the iatroX Q-Bank.

Generate Questions
SourceOpenEvidence: Product entry point
Open Link
SourcePeer-reviewed overview referencing OpenEvidence’s RAG approach (PMC)
Open Link

Official Sources

OpenEvidence — Homepage
PMC — Review describing OpenEvidence’s RAG approach