arXiv:2608. 10273v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deploying large language models (LLMs) for decision support in emergency departments (EDs) faces two major challenges: privacy risks of transmitting patient data to closed-source commercial LLMs and the lack of systematic evaluation of fine-tuning strategies for locally deployable open-source small language models (SLMs).
arXiv:2604.26766v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Accurate and consistent Emergency Severity Index (ESI) assignment remains a persistent challenge in emergency departments, where highly varia...
arXiv:2607. 28788v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Clinical diagnosis at hospital admission must be made rapidly from limited, incomplete evidence.
arXiv:2512. 01241v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are routinely used by physicians and patients for medical advice, yet their clinical safety profiles remain poorly characterized.
arXiv:2512. 01241v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) and medical AI tools are routinely used by physicians and patients for medical advice, yet their clinical safety profiles remain poorly characterized.
arXiv:2606. 19183v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can make clinical decision support more accessible by interpreting free-text documentation, but their direct use as diagnostic engines is limited by sensitivity to prompts, information order, and plausible but incorrect outputs.
The study evaluates large language models (LLMs) on sequential emergency department triage, where acuity labels are predicted from progressively longer nurse‑patient conversations. Six LLMs were tested at five checkpoints on simulated and physician‑authored dialogues, showing a decline from moderate‑to‑substantial agreement on full records to only fair‑to‑moderate agreement at each checkpoint. The models consistently anchor on chief complaint exchanges and fail to integrate later evidence, yielding low agreement with clinicians (QWK 0.295 vs. 0.887‑0.929) and concentrating predictions on ESI‑2 and ESI‑3. whyItMatters":"The findings reveal that LLMs, despite strong offline performance, cannot reliably handle the sequential nature of real‑time triage, highlighting a critical gap for safe deployment in emergency settings."
The study evaluates counterfactual bias in ten open‑source large language models (LLMs) for pediatric Emergency Severity Index (ESI) prediction. By creating paired clinical vignettes that differ only in demographic or socioeconomic variables, the authors measure shifts in acuity assignment, finding that counterfactual sensitivity varies widely across model families and sizes. A fine‑tuned Qwen2.5‑7B model exhibited the lowest sensitivity, while larger or medical‑domain models sometimes showed greater shifts, highlighting the need for fairness assessment before clinical deployment.
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.
This study benchmarks transformer models for Bangla medical named entity recognition (NER), comparing BanglaBERT, multilingual BERT (mBERT), XLM‑RoBERTa, and GPT‑4o mini under zero‑shot and few‑shot prompting. Across a full test set of 3,179 samples, fine‑tuned XLM‑RoBERTa achieves a new state‑of‑the‑art F1‑score of 0.5959, while BanglaBERT lags with 0.4937, suggesting that domain diversity outweighs language specificity. The analysis shows high performance on Medicine and Specialist entities (F1 > 0.83) but lower accuracy on Symptoms (F1 0.4367), and demonstrates that fine‑tuned transformers outperform prompt‑only approaches by a factor of 3.76.
The paper introduces a benchmark of over 6,000 clinical triage scenarios, 7,000 physician annotations, and 225,000 large language model (LLM) responses to assess how LLMs perform under realistic variations in clinical text. The study finds that LLMs tend to recommend unnecessary care more often than physicians, especially when the input text is perturbed, and that LLM recommendations are more sensitive to gender and tone changes than human recommendations. These findings underscore the importance of deployment‑oriented evaluations that reflect expert physician behavior.
arXiv:2609.14819v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have a growing range of applications in medicine, and their evaluation is critical for ensuring they provide benefit and...
arXiv:2607. 15380v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Electronic health records combine free-text clinical narratives with structured measurements such as vital signs, laboratory values, and comorbidities.