All Required, In Order: Phase-Level Evaluation for AI-Human Dialogue in Healthcare and Beyond

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.08690v1
• Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 16:15:38 GMT
• Title: All Required, In Order: Phase-Level Evaluation for AI-Human Dialogue in Healthcare and Beyond
• Abstract summary: We introduce Obligatory-Information Phase Structured Compliance Evaluation (OIP-SCE)<n>OIP-SCE checks whether every required clinical obligation is met, in the right order, with clear evidence for clinicians to review.<n>This makes complex rules practical and auditable, helping close the gap between technical progress and what healthcare actually needs.
• Score: 40.157413213893165
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Conversational AI is starting to support real clinical work, but most evaluation methods miss how compliance depends on the full course of a conversation. We introduce Obligatory-Information Phase Structured Compliance Evaluation (OIP-SCE), an evaluation method that checks whether every required clinical obligation is met, in the right order, with clear evidence for clinicians to review. This makes complex rules practical and auditable, helping close the gap between technical progress and what healthcare actually needs. We demonstrate the method in two case studies (respiratory history, benefits verification) and show how phase-level evidence turns policy into shared, actionable steps. By giving clinicians control over what to check and engineers a clear specification to implement, OIP-SCE provides a single, auditable evaluation surface that aligns AI capability with clinical workflow and supports routine, safe use.

Related papers

• Three Generations of Healthcare IT: From the Digital Record to the Computable Care Process [47.027290803102666]
  We describe a computational layer whose object is patient-specific clinical intent.<n>We formalize the Actionable Clinical Record as the atomic object of the third layer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-09T16:44:28Z)
• ClinConsensus: A Consensus-Based Benchmark for Evaluating Chinese Medical LLMs across Difficulty Levels [39.33170904610862]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to health management, showing promise across disease prevention, clinical decision-making, and long-term care.<n>We introduce ClinConsensus, a Chinese medical benchmark curated, validated and quality-controlled by clinical experts.<n> ClinConsensus comprises 2500 open-ended cases spanning the full continuum of care--from prevention and intervention to long-term follow-up--covering 36 medical specialties, 12 common clinical task types, and progressively increasing levels of complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T17:17:18Z)
• Responsible Evaluation of AI for Mental Health [72.85175110624736]
  Current approaches to evaluating AI tools in mental health care are fragmented and poorly aligned with clinical practice, social context, and first-hand user experience.<n>This paper argues for a rethinking of responsible evaluation by introducing an interdisciplinary framework that integrates clinical soundness, social context, and equity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T12:55:10Z)
• MedConsultBench: A Full-Cycle, Fine-Grained, Process-Aware Benchmark for Medical Consultation Agents [10.109613967215447]
  We propose MedConsultBench, a comprehensive framework designed to evaluate the complete online consultation cycle.<n>Our methodology introduces Atomic Information Units (AIUs) to track clinical information acquisition at a sub-turn level.<n>By addressing the underspecification and ambiguity inherent in online consultations, the benchmark evaluates uncertainty-aware yet concise inquiry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T02:18:10Z)
• Benchmarking Egocentric Clinical Intent Understanding Capability for Medical Multimodal Large Language Models [48.95516224614331]
  We introduce MedGaze-Bench, the first benchmark leveraging clinician gaze as a Cognitive Cursor to assess intent understanding across surgery, emergency simulation, and diagnostic interpretation.<n>Our benchmark addresses three fundamental challenges: visual homogeneity of anatomical structures, strict temporal-causal dependencies in clinical, and implicit adherence to safety protocols.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-11T02:20:40Z)
• CP-Env: Evaluating Large Language Models on Clinical Pathways in a Controllable Hospital Environment [29.48544328813161]
  We introduce CP-Env, a controllable agentic hospital environment designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) across end-to-end clinical pathways.<n>Following real hospital adaptive flow of healthcare, it enables branching, long-horizon task execution.<n>Results reveal that most models struggle with pathway hallucinations, exhibiting complexity and losing critical diagnostic details.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-11T01:54:55Z)
• Before the Clinic: Transparent and Operable Design Principles for Healthcare AI [42.994619952353396]
  We propose two foundational design principles to operationalize pre-clinical technical requirements for healthcare AI.<n>We ground these principles in established XAI frameworks, map them to documented clinician needs, and demonstrate their alignment with emerging governance requirements.<n>This pre-clinical playbook provides actionable guidance for development teams, accelerates the path to clinical evaluation, and establishes a shared vocabulary bridging AI researchers, healthcare practitioners, and regulatory stakeholders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-31T04:05:09Z)
• Simulating Viva Voce Examinations to Evaluate Clinical Reasoning in Large Language Models [51.91760712805404]
  We introduce VivaBench, a benchmark for evaluating sequential clinical reasoning in large language models (LLMs)<n>Our dataset consists of 1762 physician-curated clinical vignettes structured as interactive scenarios that simulate a (oral) examination in medical training.<n>Our analysis identified several failure modes that mirror common cognitive errors in clinical practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-11T16:24:35Z)
• Systematic Literature Review on Clinical Trial Eligibility Matching [0.24554686192257422]
  Review highlights how explainable AI and standardized ontology can bolster clinician trust and broaden adoption.<n>Further research into advanced semantic and temporal representations, expanded data integration, and rigorous prospective evaluations is necessary to fully realize the transformative potential of NLP in clinical trial recruitment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-02T11:45:50Z)
• Beyond One-Time Validation: A Framework for Adaptive Validation of Prognostic and Diagnostic AI-based Medical Devices [55.319842359034546]
  Existing approaches often fall short in addressing the complexity of practically deploying these devices. The presented framework emphasizes the importance of repeating validation and fine-tuning during deployment. It is positioned within the current US and EU regulatory landscapes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-07T11:13:52Z)
• 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)
• AutoTrial: Prompting Language Models for Clinical Trial Design [53.630479619856516]
  We present a method named AutoTrial to aid the design of clinical eligibility criteria using language models. Experiments on over 70K clinical trials verify that AutoTrial generates high-quality criteria texts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T01:04:16Z)
• A Methodology for Bi-Directional Knowledge-Based Assessment of Compliance to Continuous Application of Clinical Guidelines [1.52292571922932]
  We introduce a new approach for automated guideline-based quality assessment of the care process. The BiKBAC method assesses the degree of compliance when applying clinical guidelines. The DiscovErr system was evaluated in a separate study in the type 2 diabetes management domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-13T20:43:45Z)

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.