arXiv:2609.20827v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Hospital discharge education is an interactive teaching task: a clinician adapts a discharge plan to a patient's literacy, recall, and personality. Exi...
arXiv:2610.09209v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Substance Use Disorder (SUD) counseling requires patient responses that reflect underlying cognitive states such as beliefs, coping strategies, and rea...
arXiv:2609.38480v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Most clinical benchmarks evaluate language models (LMs) on diagnosis using complete case descriptions. In clinical practice, however, patients presen...
The paper introduces a de‑identified corpus of 33 in‑person cognitive assessment conversations, comprising 8,250 utterances annotated for three speaker roles and 56 dialogue acts. The authors benchmark large language models on fine‑grained dialogue‑act classification and next‑patient‑utterance generation, finding that instruction tuning and reasoning‑aware fine‑tuning improve performance but that models still struggle with closely related dialogue acts. The corpus and benchmark are presented as tools to measure interaction structure in cognitive assessments and to support future research on conversational markers, clinician education, and validated simulated patients.
arXiv:2606. 17474v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly considered for use in clinical consultation tasks, yet most medical evaluations remain static, single-turn, or narrowly outcome-based, limiting their ability to reflect the sequential, uncertain, and interactive nature of real-world care.
The study introduces a scaffolding-oriented multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) AI Standardized Patient (AI-SP) platform designed to train medical students in patient interviews. In a randomized controlled trial with 100 students, the multi-agent system—comprising a patient agent, a Socratic tutor agent, and a turn-level evaluator—did not improve diagnostic accuracy but significantly enhanced overall OSCE scores, especially in communication, empathy, and history-taking. The authors also release a richly annotated dataset to support further research in AI-supported clinical reasoning training.
Large language model assistants are being deployed to clinicians, but their readiness is judged mainly by benchmark scores that are based on examination questions or curated cases. This study analyzed 127,833 queries from 6,342 healthcare professionals across 35 specialties, finding that most requests were for documentation, administration, and knowledge retrieval, with a significant portion of queries unanswerable. When compared to 58 public benchmarks, the median benchmark lacked documentation requests and only shared 31% of the real task mix, indicating that current benchmarks poorly reflect actual clinical use.
arXiv:2509. 02594v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on their ability to generate high-quality, accurate, situationally aware answers to clinical questions requires going beyond conventional benchmarks to assess how these systems behave in complex, high-stakes clinical scenarios.
MindEval2 is a new evaluation framework for AI chatbots in mental health support, comprising Mental Health Quality Rubrics (MHQR) and the MindSim patient simulation harness. MHQR, developed with PhD-level psychologists, provides explicit, actionable criteria for assessing response quality, while MindSim offers realistic, longitudinal patient interactions with a memory component. The study evaluated 18 models, finding that although surface-level quality has improved, guidance calibration remains the main failure across all models.
The study introduces MedQADE, a German open‑response clinical benchmark with 3,800 question‑answer pairs and physician reference annotations. It evaluates large language models (LLMs) as judges, finding that while some LLMs (e.g., Gemini 3 Flash) achieve physician‑level agreement on correctness, they exhibit self‑bias and low abstention rates. Physicians showed moderate agreement on correctness but limited agreement on difficulty, and their abstention increased with perceived difficulty.
The paper introduces DistressBench, a benchmark comprising 718 English clinician-authored conversations covering 23 self-harm subcategories, each evaluated against a weighted rubric across seven crisis-support dimensions. Models are scored by the fraction of criteria they satisfy, revealing that the best models meet 88.4% of weighted criteria while clinicians achieve 98.7%. The study highlights gaps in crisis response, notably that 35.3% of conversations where crisis is recognized fail to route users to human help, underscoring the need to evaluate models on supportive care rather than mere refusal.
EduDial is a large-scale multi-turn teacher‑student dialogue corpus covering 345 core knowledge points and 34,250 dialogue sessions, designed around Bloom’s taxonomy and ten questioning strategies such as situational, ZPD, and metacognitive questioning. The dataset includes differentiated teaching strategies for students at varying cognitive levels to provide targeted guidance. Using EduDial, the authors trained EduDial‑LLM 32B and introduced an 11‑dimensional evaluation framework that measures teaching quality and content quality, showing that most mainstream LLMs struggle with student‑centered teaching while EduDial‑LLM outperforms all baselines across all metrics.