arXiv:2410. 01227v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In the context of medical records, patients often experience testimonial injustice, where the textual account undermines the validity of their experiences.
arXiv:2605.01048v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Counterfactual prompting (i.e., perturbing a single factor and measuring output change) is widely used to evaluate things like LLM bias and C...
The study evaluates how clinical language models perform when patient narratives are presented in different voices—clinical, socioeconomic, and cultural—using 1,000 MedQA cases paired with three retellings each. All 12 tested models show a significant drop in accuracy (about 26% more errors) when the patient speaks in a marked voice, a penalty that persists even when the original vignette is included verbatim and is not explained by measured retelling properties. The authors find that rewriting the patient’s account into a clinical vignette before answering can halve this accuracy gap, though structured schema pipelines and additional reasoning tools offer limited improvements.
arXiv:2508. 08337v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Algorithmic fairness research has largely framed unfairness as discrimination along sensitive attributes.
arXiv:2609.22090v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: An LLM producing the response pattern associated with a human psychological effect is not the same claim as the LLM possessing that bias. We present Ps...
arXiv:2608. 15254v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Clinical-AI guidance increasingly recommends prompting language models to reason with attention to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).
arXiv:2607. 27304v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Medical vision-language models (VLMs) generate chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning before answering clinical questions, but whether this reasoning causally influences predictions remains unclear.
arXiv:2609.14124v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical image analysis is often hindered by biased datasets, which can lead to biased models and limited clinical applicability. A promising strategy...
arXiv:2608. 05583v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) enter high-stakes domains such as healthcare, understanding their moral reasoning becomes essential.
arXiv:2601.12868v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly operate in high-stakes settings where demographic attributes such as race and ethnicity may be expl...
As large language models (LLMs) enter high-stakes domains such as healthcare, understanding their moral reasoning becomes essential. Decisions about scarce medical resources often hinge on judgments of responsibility, particularly when patients' own actions contribute to illness.
The paper investigates intersectional biases in multimodal clinical predictions using Electronic Healthcare Records (EHR). It introduces datasets MIMIC-Eye1 and MIMIC-IV ED, applies unified text representations from pre‑trained clinical language models, and benchmarks bias mitigation at the intersectional subgroup level. Results show that subgroup‑specific mitigation is robust across datasets, subgroups, and embeddings, effectively addressing intersectional biases in multimodal settings.
CoBe is a benchmark that evaluates a model’s ability to perform conversational counterfactual text editing, requiring the model to revise a given scenario based on a hypothetical change while preserving unaffected facts. The dataset includes 2,000 questions across domains such as healthcare, science, engineering, business, and everyday life. Experiments show that current models often default to associational generation rather than maintaining causal structure, and performance does not reliably improve with larger model size or longer outputs.