arXiv:2607. 08257v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong performance on isolated psychiatric tasks, including dialogue, diagnosis, and treatment planning, yet existing benchmarks rarely simulate complete psychiatric clinical encounters.
arXiv:2605.22286v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Text-based counseling provides a valuable source of information for assessing depression severity. We study prediction of the total score on...
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 examines automatic depression detection from doctor‑patient conversations and finds that models trained on semi‑structured interview data can achieve high accuracy by exploiting fixed interviewer prompts rather than the participants’ language. Across three datasets (ANDROIDS, DAIC‑WOZ, E‑DAIC), the authors show that restricting models to participant utterances distributes decision evidence more broadly and reflects genuine linguistic cues. The study highlights a cross‑dataset, architecture‑agnostic bias introduced by interviewer prompts and calls for analyses that localize decision evidence by time and speaker to ensure models learn from participants’ language.
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.
The study presents a pipeline that uses large language models to automatically generate personalized client networks from therapy session transcripts, aiming to aid case conceptualization and treatment planning. Researchers annotated 8,028 utterances from 77 transcripts, then used binary and multi-label classification to identify clinically relevant processes and dimensions, clustered these processes, and generated connections between clusters. Evaluation showed general support for the model’s utility, though interrater agreement varied, and qualitative analysis indicated the networks were coherent and interpretable, suggesting feasibility while highlighting the need for further research on outcome improvement.
The paper introduces the first benchmark for evaluating confidence estimation in large language models during multi‑turn medical consultations, combining three types of medical data and an information sufficiency gradient to capture how confidence and correctness evolve as evidence accumulates. Experiments with 27 methods reveal that token‑level and consistency‑level confidence approaches are limited by medical data, and that medical reasoning must be judged on both diagnostic accuracy and information completeness. Building on these findings, the authors propose MedConf, a retrieval‑augmented, linguistically grounded self‑assessment framework that aligns patient information with supporting, missing, and contradictory relations, producing interpretable confidence estimates that outperform existing methods across multiple datasets and LLMs.
arXiv:2609.22778v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used as evaluators, yet their reliability in professional assessment tasks that require exper...
The paper investigates the role of minimal responses—short, empathic utterances—in psychological counseling, noting that such brief replies are common in human dialogues but underrepresented in large language model (LLM) outputs. Using a two‑stage filtering approach and contextual verification with an LLM, the authors systematically analyze minimal responses across multiple counseling datasets. They find that while strong commercial LLMs can produce minimal replies when prompted, they often fail to judge when these replies are appropriate, and counseling‑specific models trained on synthetic data tend to generate longer, content‑rich responses instead.
arXiv:2606. 30887v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models show promise for mental health support, yet therapeutic quality improves only when evaluation functions as an actionable control signal rather than a passive metric.
The paper introduces UPHELD, a large benchmark of human-to-human dialogues written by professional script writers, featuring realistic turn densities and over 36,000 per-turn human annotations. It evaluates existing automatic metrics and LLM-as-a-judge methods, finding them unreliable against expert human judgment. Using UPHELD, the authors develop a Mixture-of-Judges framework that improves correlation with human assessments by about 30%.
arXiv:2605. 18937v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Patient-managed Personal Health Records (PHRs) promises to empower patients to better understand their health; but information in the record is complex, potentially hindering insights.