A Benchmark for Long-Form Medical Question Answering

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.09834v2
• Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2024 21:04:38 GMT
• Title: A Benchmark for Long-Form Medical Question Answering
• Authors: Pedram Hosseini, Jessica M. Sin, Bing Ren, Bryceton G. Thomas, Elnaz Nouri, Ali Farahanchi, Saeed Hassanpour,
• Abstract summary: There is a lack of benchmarks for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in long-form medical question answering (QA) Most existing medical QA evaluation benchmarks focus on automatic metrics and multiple-choice questions. In this work, we introduce a new publicly available benchmark featuring real-world consumer medical questions with long-form answer evaluations annotated by medical doctors.
• Score: 4.815957808858573
• License:
• Abstract: There is a lack of benchmarks for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in long-form medical question answering (QA). Most existing medical QA evaluation benchmarks focus on automatic metrics and multiple-choice questions. While valuable, these benchmarks fail to fully capture or assess the complexities of real-world clinical applications where LLMs are being deployed. Furthermore, existing studies on evaluating long-form answer generation in medical QA are primarily closed-source, lacking access to human medical expert annotations, which makes it difficult to reproduce results and enhance existing baselines. In this work, we introduce a new publicly available benchmark featuring real-world consumer medical questions with long-form answer evaluations annotated by medical doctors. We performed pairwise comparisons of responses from various open and closed-source medical and general-purpose LLMs based on criteria such as correctness, helpfulness, harmfulness, and bias. Additionally, we performed a comprehensive LLM-as-a-judge analysis to study the alignment between human judgments and LLMs. Our preliminary results highlight the strong potential of open LLMs in medical QA compared to leading closed models. Code & Data: https://github.com/lavita-ai/medical-eval-sphere

Related papers

• Comprehensive and Practical Evaluation of Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems for Medical Question Answering [70.44269982045415]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has emerged as a promising approach to enhance the performance of large language models (LLMs) We introduce Medical Retrieval-Augmented Generation Benchmark (MedRGB) that provides various supplementary elements to four medical QA datasets. Our experimental results reveals current models' limited ability to handle noise and misinformation in the retrieved documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-14T06:19:18Z)
• Towards Leveraging Large Language Models for Automated Medical Q&A Evaluation [2.7379431425414693]
  This paper explores the potential of using Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate the evaluation of responses in medical Question and Answer (Q&A) systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-03T14:38:29Z)
• GMAI-MMBench: A Comprehensive Multimodal Evaluation Benchmark Towards General Medical AI [67.09501109871351]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) are capable of handling diverse data types such as imaging, text, and physiological signals. GMAI-MMBench is the most comprehensive general medical AI benchmark with well-categorized data structure and multi-perceptual granularity to date. It is constructed from 284 datasets across 38 medical image modalities, 18 clinical-related tasks, 18 departments, and 4 perceptual granularities in a Visual Question Answering (VQA) format.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-06T17:59:21Z)
• MedBench: A Comprehensive, Standardized, and Reliable Benchmarking System for Evaluating Chinese Medical Large Language Models [55.215061531495984]
  "MedBench" is a comprehensive, standardized, and reliable benchmarking system for Chinese medical LLM. First, MedBench assembles the largest evaluation dataset (300,901 questions) to cover 43 clinical specialties. Third, MedBench implements dynamic evaluation mechanisms to prevent shortcut learning and answer remembering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T02:25:48Z)
• MedExQA: Medical Question Answering Benchmark with Multiple Explanations [2.2246416434538308]
  This paper introduces MedExQA, a novel benchmark in medical question-answering to evaluate large language models' (LLMs) understanding of medical knowledge through explanations. By constructing datasets across five distinct medical specialties, we address a major gap in current medical QA benchmarks. Our work highlights the importance of explainability in medical LLMs, proposes an effective methodology for evaluating models beyond classification accuracy, and sheds light on one specific domain, speech language pathology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-10T14:47:04Z)
• MultifacetEval: Multifaceted Evaluation to Probe LLMs in Mastering Medical Knowledge [4.8004472307210255]
  Large language models (LLMs) have excelled across domains, delivering notable performance on medical evaluation benchmarks. However, there still exists a significant gap between the reported performance and the practical effectiveness in real-world medical scenarios. We develop a novel evaluation framework MultifacetEval to examine the degree and coverage of LLMs in encoding and mastering medical knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T04:15:07Z)
• OLAPH: Improving Factuality in Biomedical Long-form Question Answering [15.585833125854418]
  We introduce MedLFQA, a benchmark dataset reconstructed using long-form question-answering datasets related to the biomedical domain. We also propose OLAPH, a simple and novel framework that utilizes cost-effective and multifaceted automatic evaluation. Our findings reveal that a 7B LLM trained with our OLAPH framework can provide long answers comparable to the medical experts' answers in terms of factuality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T11:50:16Z)
• Large Language Models in the Clinic: A Comprehensive Benchmark [63.21278434331952]
  We build a benchmark ClinicBench to better understand large language models (LLMs) in the clinic. We first collect eleven existing datasets covering diverse clinical language generation, understanding, and reasoning tasks. We then construct six novel datasets and clinical tasks that are complex but common in real-world practice. We conduct an extensive evaluation of twenty-two LLMs under both zero-shot and few-shot settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-25T15:51:06Z)
• Asclepius: A Spectrum Evaluation Benchmark for Medical Multi-Modal Large Language Models [59.60384461302662]
  We introduce Asclepius, a novel benchmark for evaluating Medical Multi-Modal Large Language Models (Med-MLLMs) Asclepius rigorously and comprehensively assesses model capability in terms of distinct medical specialties and different diagnostic capacities. We also provide an in-depth analysis of 6 Med-MLLMs and compare them with 5 human specialists.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-17T08:04:23Z)
• AI Hospital: Benchmarking Large Language Models in a Multi-agent Medical Interaction Simulator [69.51568871044454]
  We introduce textbfAI Hospital, a framework simulating dynamic medical interactions between emphDoctor as player and NPCs. This setup allows for realistic assessments of LLMs in clinical scenarios. We develop the Multi-View Medical Evaluation benchmark, utilizing high-quality Chinese medical records and NPCs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T06:46:48Z)
• Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledge [21.630872464930587]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in natural language understanding and generation. We propose a framework for human evaluation of model answers along multiple axes including factuality, precision, possible harm, and bias. We show that comprehension, recall of knowledge, and medical reasoning improve with model scale and instruction prompt tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-26T14:28:24Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.