Beyond Medical Chatbots: Meddollina and the Rise of Continuous Clinical Intelligence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.22645v1
• Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2026 07:05:14 GMT
• Title: Beyond Medical Chatbots: Meddollina and the Rise of Continuous Clinical Intelligence
• Abstract summary: We formalise Clinical Contextual Intelligence (CCI) as a capability class required for real-world clinical use.<n>We introduce Meddollina, a governance-first clinical intelligence system designed to constrain inference before language realisation.<n>We evaluate Meddollina using a behaviour-first regime across 16,412+ heterogeneous medical queries.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative medical AI now appears fluent and knowledgeable enough to resemble clinical intelligence, encouraging the belief that scaling will make it safe. But clinical reasoning is not text generation. It is a responsibility-bound process under ambiguity, incomplete evidence, and longitudinal context. Even as benchmark scores rise, generation-centric systems still show behaviours incompatible with clinical deployment: premature closure, unjustified certainty, intent drift, and instability across multi-step decisions. We argue these are structural consequences of treating medicine as next-token prediction. We formalise Clinical Contextual Intelligence (CCI) as a distinct capability class required for real-world clinical use, defined by persistent context awareness, intent preservation, bounded inference, and principled deferral when evidence is insufficient. We introduce Meddollina, a governance-first clinical intelligence system designed to constrain inference before language realisation, prioritising clinical appropriateness over generative completeness. Meddollina acts as a continuous intelligence layer supporting clinical workflows while preserving clinician authority. We evaluate Meddollina using a behaviour-first regime across 16,412+ heterogeneous medical queries, benchmarking against general-purpose models, medical-tuned models, and retrieval-augmented systems. Meddollina exhibits a distinct behavioural profile: calibrated uncertainty, conservative reasoning under underspecification, stable longitudinal constraint adherence, and reduced speculative completion relative to generation-centric baselines. These results suggest deployable medical AI will not emerge from scaling alone, motivating a shift toward Continuous Clinical Intelligence, where progress is measured by clinician-aligned behaviour under uncertainty rather than fluency-driven completion.

Related papers

• Rethinking Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging: Assumptions, Reality, and Reframing [29.25526289599026]
  We argue that a decade of intense research has not translated into proportionate bedside impact.<n>This Perspective identifies six interconnected dimensions of this misalignment.<n>We propose a vision of agentic, physician-aligned AI that extends, rather than replaces, clinical judgment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T19:55:49Z)
• Reasoning in Real World Clinical Care: Why Large Language Models Are Not Yet Safe for Autonomous Clinical Decision Support [1.4678996144709464]
  This Perspective concerns the most consequential of these applications: the autonomous triage of self-presenting, undifferentiated patients.<n>A model optimized to continue the most probable text is not optimized to act safely when the safe answer is the improbable must-not-miss diagnosis.<n>The core deficit is therefore one of information gathering under uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-29T07:12:46Z)
• MedCTA: A Benchmark for Clinical Tool Agents [47.47354499871572]
  We introduce MedCTA, a benchmark for evaluating medical tool agents on clinician-validated, step-implicit tasks.<n>MedCTA comprises 107 real-world clinical tasks with clinician-verified executable trajectories over 5 deployed tools.<n>We benchmark 18 open- and closed-source multimodal models and find that even frontier systems remain brittle in multi-step clinical tool use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-10T06:26:52Z)
• Medical Model Synthesis Architectures: A Case Study [72.46211022258122]
  Current AI systems struggle with calibrated reasoning under uncertainty.<n>We propose a framework for AI systems that can make practically useful but formally transparent clinical predictions under uncertainty.<n>We show how an initial proof-of-concept of this framework can be used for differential diagnosis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-10T19:30:16Z)
• From Black-Box Confidence to Measurable Trust in Clinical AI: A Framework for Evidence, Supervision, and Staged Autonomy [0.0]
  Trust in clinical artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be reduced to model accuracy, fluency of generation, or overall positive user impression.<n>This article proposes a framework for trustworthy clinical AI built around three principles: evidence, supervision, and staged autonomy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-29T13:40:14Z)
• Bridging AI and Clinical Reasoning: Abductive Explanations for Alignment on Critical Symptoms [5.220940151628734]
  Key challenge is that AI reasoning diverges from structured clinical frameworks.<n>We leverage formal abductive explanations, which offer consistent, guaranteed reasoning.<n>This enables a clear understanding of AI decision-making and allows alignment with clinical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-15T04:27:59Z)
• AgentsEval: Clinically Faithful Evaluation of Medical Imaging Reports via Multi-Agent Reasoning [73.50200033931148]
  We introduce AgentsEval, a multi-agent stream reasoning framework that emulates the collaborative diagnostic workflow of radiologists.<n>By dividing the evaluation process into interpretable steps including criteria definition, evidence extraction, alignment, and consistency scoring, AgentsEval provides explicit reasoning traces and structured clinical feedback.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that AgentsEval delivers clinically aligned, semantically faithful, and interpretable evaluations that remain robust under paraphrastic, semantic, and stylistic perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T11:59:13Z)
• How Clinicians Think and What AI Can Learn From It [0.0]
  Most clinical AI systems operate as prediction engines -- producing labels or risk scores -- yet real clinical reasoning is a time-bounded, sequential control problem under uncertainty.<n>We argue that the dominant computational substrate of clinician reasoning is not cardinal optimization but ordinal, non-compensatory decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-18T19:19:41Z)
• 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)
• MedCEG: Reinforcing Verifiable Medical Reasoning with Critical Evidence Graph [17.320322032287894]
  We propose MedCEG, a framework that augments medical language models with clinically valid reasoning pathways.<n>To guide the reasoning process, we introduce a Clinical Reasoning Procedure Reward.<n> Experimental results show that MedCEG surpasses existing methods in performance while producing clinically valid reasoning chains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-15T16:38:46Z)
• 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)
• Beyond Classification Accuracy: Neural-MedBench and the Need for Deeper Reasoning Benchmarks [21.203358914772465]
  Recent advances in vision-language models (VLMs) have achieved remarkable performance on standard medical benchmarks, yet their true clinical reasoning ability remains unclear.<n>We introduce Neural-MedBench, a compact yet reasoning-intensive benchmark designed to probe the limits of multimodal clinical reasoning in neurology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-26T12:20:01Z)
• A Comprehensive Review of Datasets for Clinical Mental Health AI Systems [55.67299586253951]
  We present the first comprehensive survey of clinical mental health datasets relevant to the training and development of AI-powered clinical assistants.<n>Our survey identifies critical gaps such as a lack of longitudinal data, limited cultural and linguistic representation, inconsistent collection and annotation standards, and a lack of modalities in synthetic data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-13T13:42:35Z)
• Uncertainty-Driven Expert Control: Enhancing the Reliability of Medical Vision-Language Models [52.2001050216955]
  Existing methods aim to enhance the performance of Medical Vision Language Model (MedVLM) by adjusting model structure, fine-tuning with high-quality data, or through preference fine-tuning.<n>We propose an expert-in-the-loop framework named Expert-Controlled-Free Guidance (Expert-CFG) to align MedVLM with clinical expertise without additional training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-12T09:03:30Z)
• Medical Hallucinations in Foundation Models and Their Impact on Healthcare [71.15392179084428]
  Hallucinations in foundation models arise from autoregressive training objectives.<n>Top-performing models exceeded 97% accuracy when augmented with chain-of-thought prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T02:30:44Z)
• TrialBench: Multi-Modal Artificial Intelligence-Ready Clinical Trial Datasets [54.98321887435557]
  This paper presents a suite of 23 meticulously curated AI-ready datasets covering multi-modal input features and 8 crucial prediction challenges in clinical trial design.<n>We provide basic validation methods for each task to ensure the datasets' usability and reliability.<n>We anticipate that the availability of such open-access datasets will catalyze the development of advanced AI approaches for clinical trial design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-30T09:13:10Z)
• Clinical Outcome Prediction from Admission Notes using Self-Supervised Knowledge Integration [55.88616573143478]
  Outcome prediction from clinical text can prevent doctors from overlooking possible risks. Diagnoses at discharge, procedures performed, in-hospital mortality and length-of-stay prediction are four common outcome prediction targets. We propose clinical outcome pre-training to integrate knowledge about patient outcomes from multiple public sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-08T10:26:44Z)

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.