Routing different clinical questions to different AI models based on what each one does best—one model for analyzing lab results, another for generating narratives, another for catching medication interactions. This approach acknowledges that no single tool is optimal for every kind of thinking.
No single AI model is best at everything. Claude excels at nuanced reasoning and long-form synthesis. GPT-4 is strong at structured data extraction and medical knowledge. Gemini handles multimodal input (text + images, like lab reports with charts). A multi-model routing strategy sends different caregiving tasks to the model best suited for each, improving accuracy and sometimes reducing cost.
Instead of asking one AI to handle all your caregiving questions, you architect a system that directs tasks based on their nature. Medication interaction checking → GPT-4 or Claude (both have strong pharmacological knowledge). Appointment note summarization → Gemini or Claude (good at synthesis). Extracting structured data from messy notes → GPT-4 (excellent at parsing). Long-form care plan updates → Claude (best at coherent long-text generation). This isn't doing multiple things in parallel unnecessarily; it's matching problem types to model strengths.
Scenario one: Medication safety review. A new prescription arrives. You need to check interactions with current medications, assess for dose appropriateness, and flag renal/liver considerations. This is a constrained problem with known-good answers. Route to Claude for safety-critical reasoning (it's conservative and explicit about uncertainty). If you're on a tight budget, GPT-4 is slightly cheaper and still reliable here.
Scenario two: Pattern detection across appointments. You want to identify whether a patient's symptoms are trending better or worse over six months. This requires synthesizing themes across multiple documents and building narrative understanding. Route to Claude—it's superior at long-form coherent reasoning across complex inputs.
Scenario three: Extracting structured data. Pull allergies, current medications, recent labs, and upcoming appointments from a disorganized appointment note. This is a parsing task—structured extraction. GPT-4 is optimal. It's faster, cheaper, and extremely reliable at this task.
Scenario four: Visual interpretation. A patient receives imaging (X-ray, ultrasound, lab chart). You need AI to describe what's visible and flag concerning findings. Gemini excels here with multimodal processing. Claude doesn't handle images as well.
For a caregiver using Zapier or a custom workflow: Step one—define task type (medication check, summarization, extraction, etc.). Step two—route to appropriate model (either explicitly in your workflow rules, or have an AI router read the query and decide). Step three—execute and return results. Step four—optionally, validate with a second model if the decision is high-stakes.
Example workflow: New appointment note arrives → automated task classification → if medication extraction, send to GPT-4 → if safety flagging needed, also send to Claude → consolidate results → notify caregiver. This hybrid approach catches more than any single model.
Different models have different pricing and latency. Claude costs more per token than GPT-3.5 but less than GPT-4. Gemini is competitive on price. For high-volume tasks (daily medication checks), route to the cheapest reliable option. For rare high-stakes decisions (care plan overhauls), use the strongest model regardless of cost. A two-minute delay for a quarterly review is fine; a 30-second delay on a daily medication check is frustrating.
For critical decisions, implement a validation step: after the first model responds, optionally query a second model (perhaps only if the first model flagged a concern). This catches hallucinations or model-specific blind spots. It costs slightly more but significantly improves safety.
Try this: Audit your caregiving AI usage over the past month. Identify 3-5 recurring task types: medication reviews, appointment summaries, data extraction, care plan updates, symptom tracking. For each, try running a sample through your current model, then through an alternative (Claude, GPT-4, Gemini depending on what you've used). Note which produces the clearest, most useful output. Document your findings. Then redesign your workflow to route each task type to its optimal model. Test the hybrid system on real upcoming work. You'll likely see faster, cheaper, and more reliable results.
Peri can explain this concept, give practical examples, help you decide whether it applies to your situation, or recommend a journey if appropriate.
Explore related journeys or tell Peri what you're working through.