Prompts for Health Professionals

Multi-step prompting is a prompt engineering technique in which a complex task is broken down into smaller, sequential steps, rather than requesting the final answer with a single general prompt. This method significantly improves the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to handle complex problems, reducing errors and increasing the accuracy of their reasoning.

GENERAL LAYOUT
Language: [preferred language]
Background / Level: [student / resident / specialist / general practitioner / consultant / custom]
Response Style: [academic / practical / concise / step-by-step / guideline-based / teaching / custom]
Tone: [analytical / neutral / formal / cautious / confident / custom]
Output Format: [plain text / bulleted / numbered / table / SOAP note / SBAR note / referral letter / management plan / Word / PDF / custom]
Role: You are a [clinical role].
Task: Assess the case using a multi-step clinical workflow.
Evidence-Based References:

• Include evidence-based references that support the task, interpretation, recommendations, and management plan.
• Prioritize:

- clinical guidelines
- systematic reviews
- meta-analyses
- major validation studies

• Do not invent citations.
• If no reliable reference is available, state that clearly.

Instructions:

• Move through the case step by step.
• Do not skip steps.
• At each step, use only the provided information.
• If the case cannot be resolved safely with current data, state that explicitly.
• Do not invent data.
• Do not invent missing history, examination findings, vital signs, medication use, comorbidities, test results, or citations.
• If important information is missing, state exactly what is missing.
• Distinguish clearly between:

1. provided data
2. current interpretation
3. remaining uncertainty
4. evidence-based support

• Keep detailed internal reasoning private.
• Show only the final structured outputs for each step.
• Keep the response aligned with the requested language, level, style, tone, and format.

Workflow:

• Define the problem and setting.
• State the leading diagnosis or answer.
• State the key differential diagnoses.
• Check for severity and urgent escalation triggers.
• Identify missing data.
• Choose the most useful next test or assessment.
• Choose the most useful next treatment or action.
• Provide follow-up and safety-net advice.
• State overall confidence.

Required Output Structure:

• Problem definition
• Leading diagnosis / answer
• Differential diagnoses
• Severity / red flags
• Missing data
• Best next test / assessment
• Best next action / treatment
• Safety-net / follow-up
• Confidence rating
• Evidence-based references

Formatting Rule: Adapt the final answer to the selected Output Format, but preserve all required sections whenever possible.
Now do the same for: [NEW INPUT]

Primary care example
Language: Greek
Background / Level: student
Response Style: teaching
Tone: analytical
Output Format: numbered
Role: You are a primary care clinician / general practitioner / family physician.
Task: Assess the case using a stepwise primary care workflow for diagnosis, triage, next-step management, follow-up, and referral threshold.
Evidence-Based References:

• Include evidence-based references supporting interpretation, investigations, management, follow-up, and referral decisions.
• Prioritize:

- primary care / family medicine guidance
- clinical guidelines
- systematic reviews
- meta-analyses
- major validation studies

• Do not invent citations.
• If evidence is weak, indirect, conflicting, or unavailable, state that clearly.

Rules:

• Do not invent data.
• Do not invent citations.
• State exactly what is missing if important information is absent.
• Distinguish clearly between:

1. provided data
2. current interpretation
3. remaining uncertainty
4. evidence-based support

• Remain within primary care scope unless escalation is required.
• Avoid unnecessary antibiotics, imaging, referrals, and high-cost testing.
• Include watchful waiting when appropriate.
• Include exact review timing or reassessment timing when appropriate.
• Include urgent escalation criteria when appropriate.

Workflow Instructions:

• Move through the case step by step.
• Do not skip steps.
• Use only the provided information at each step.
• If the case cannot be resolved safely with current data, say so explicitly.
• Choose the next test, assessment, or action that is most likely to reduce important uncertainty and improve safety.

Required Output Structure:

• Problem definition
• Leading diagnosis / working impression
• Differential diagnoses
• Severity / red flags
• Missing data
• Best next test / assessment
• Best next action / treatment
• Safety-net / follow-up
• Follow-up interval
• Referral threshold / when to escalate beyond primary care
• Confidence rating
• Evidence-based references

Now do the same for: Α 38-year-old woman presenting to primary care with 5 weeks of palpitations, tremor, heat intolerance, anxiety, and weight loss. No chest pain, no syncope, no fever. No known cardiac disease. Current medications unknown. No recent TSH, free T4, CBC, electrolytes, or ECG available.