A Decade-Scale Benchmark Evaluating LLMs' Clinical Practice Guidelines Detection and Adherence in Multi-turn Conversations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.25196v1
• Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2026 09:00:55 GMT
• Title: A Decade-Scale Benchmark Evaluating LLMs' Clinical Practice Guidelines Detection and Adherence in Multi-turn Conversations
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in healthcare scenarios.<n>It is unclear to which extend LLMs could identify and adhere to clinical guidelines during conversations.<n>CPGBench is an automated framework benchmarking the clinical guideline detection and adherence capabilities of LLMs.
• Score: 60.2076951536797
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) play a pivotal role in ensuring evidence-based decision-making and improving patient outcomes. While Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in healthcare scenarios, it is unclear to which extend LLMs could identify and adhere to CPGs during conversations. To address this gap, we introduce CPGBench, an automated framework benchmarking the clinical guideline detection and adherence capabilities of LLMs in multi-turn conversations. We collect 3,418 CPG documents from 9 countries/regions and 2 international organizations published in the last decade spanning across 24 specialties. From these documents, we extract 32,155 clinical recommendations with corresponding publication institute, date, country, specialty, recommendation strength, evidence level, etc. One multi-turn conversation is generated for each recommendation accordingly to evaluate the detection and adherence capabilities of 8 leading LLMs. We find that the 71.1%-89.6% recommendations can be correctly detected, while only 3.6%-29.7% corresponding titles can be correctly referenced, revealing the gap between knowing the guideline contents and where they come from. The adherence rates range from 21.8% to 63.2% in different models, indicating a large gap between knowing the guidelines and being able to apply them. To confirm the validity of our automatic analysis, we further conduct a comprehensive human evaluation involving 56 clinicians from different specialties. To our knowledge, CPGBench is the first benchmark systematically revealing which clinical recommendations LLMs fail to detect or adhere to during conversations. Given that each clinical recommendation may affect a large population and that clinical applications are inherently safety critical, addressing these gaps is crucial for the safe and responsible deployment of LLMs in real world clinical practice.

Related papers

• ResidencyRL: Reinforcement Learning in Simulated Clinical Environments [53.76751756107077]
  We present ResidencyRL, a reinforcement learning (RL) method for training clinical artificial intelligence (AI) agents through simulated multi-turn clinical encounters.<n>On heldout evaluations, the ResidencyRL agent improves diagnostic accuracy by 7.0% under adversarial conditions.<n>Blinded expert clinicians validated these gains, preferring the trained agent in 87.6% of side-by-side comparisons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-07T17:04:41Z)
• GlobalDentBench: A Multinational Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Clinical Reasoning in Dentistry with Expert Calibration [35.3851755931076]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold transformative potential for medicine, but their reasoning robustness and safety in real-world clinical scenarios remain critically underexplored, particularly in dentistry.<n>Here we introduce GlobalDentBench, the first multinational dental benchmark featuring a taxonomy that encompasses 14 dental specialties across 88 countries and regions spanning six continents.<n>The benchmark comprises 8,978 expert-validated questions across three formats (multiple-choice, short-answer, and case-based questions) and assesses three progressive reasoning levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T15:53:44Z)
• Clinical Validation of Medical-based Large Language Model Chatbots on Ophthalmic Patient Queries with LLM-based Evaluation [1.6570903210287165]
  Domain specific large language models are increasingly used to support patient education, triage, and clinical decision making in ophthalmology.<n>This study evaluated four small medical LLMs Meerkat-7B, BioMistral-7B, OpenBioLLM-8B, and MedLLaMA3-v20 in answering ophthalmology related patient queries.<n>Overall, medical LLMs demonstrated potential for safe ophthalmic question answering, but gaps remained in clinical depth and consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T07:00:20Z)
• Evolving Diagnostic Agents in a Virtual Clinical Environment [75.59389103511559]
  We present a framework for training large language models (LLMs) as diagnostic agents with reinforcement learning.<n>Our method acquires diagnostic strategies through interactive exploration and outcome-based feedback.<n>DiagAgent significantly outperforms 10 state-of-the-art LLMs, including DeepSeek-v3 and GPT-4o.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T17:19:47Z)
• A Novel Evaluation Benchmark for Medical LLMs: Illuminating Safety and Effectiveness in Clinical Domains [15.73821689524201]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold promise in clinical decision support but face major challenges in safety evaluation and effectiveness validation.<n>We developed the Clinical Safety-Effectiveness Dual-Track Benchmark (CSEDB), a multidimensional framework built on clinical expert consensus.<n>Thirty-two specialist physicians developed and reviewed 2,069 open-ended Q&A items aligned with these criteria, spanning 26 clinical departments to simulate real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-31T12:10:00Z)
• Quantifying the Reasoning Abilities of LLMs on Real-world Clinical Cases [48.87360916431396]
  We introduce MedR-Bench, a benchmarking dataset of 1,453 structured patient cases, annotated with reasoning references.<n>We propose a framework encompassing three critical examination recommendation, diagnostic decision-making, and treatment planning, simulating the entire patient care journey.<n>Using this benchmark, we evaluate five state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs, including DeepSeek-R1, OpenAI-o3-mini, and Gemini-2.0-Flash Thinking, etc.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T18:35:39Z)
• oRetrieval Augmented Generation for 10 Large Language Models and its Generalizability in Assessing Medical Fitness [4.118721833273984]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) show potential for medical applications but often lack specialized clinical knowledge. Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) allows customization with domain-specific information, making it suitable for healthcare. This study evaluates the accuracy, consistency, and safety of RAG models in determining fitness for surgery and providing preoperative instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-11T00:34:20Z)
• CliMedBench: A Large-Scale Chinese Benchmark for Evaluating Medical Large Language Models in Clinical Scenarios [50.032101237019205]
  CliMedBench is a comprehensive benchmark with 14 expert-guided core clinical scenarios. The reliability of this benchmark has been confirmed in several ways.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T15:15:36Z)
• MedAlign: A Clinician-Generated Dataset for Instruction Following with Electronic Medical Records [60.35217378132709]
  Large language models (LLMs) can follow natural language instructions with human-level fluency. evaluating LLMs on realistic text generation tasks for healthcare remains challenging. We introduce MedAlign, a benchmark dataset of 983 natural language instructions for EHR data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-27T12:24:39Z)
• Clinical Camel: An Open Expert-Level Medical Language Model with Dialogue-Based Knowledge Encoding [31.884600238089405]
  We present Clinical Camel, an open large language model (LLM) explicitly tailored for clinical research. Fine-tuned from LLaMA-2 using QLoRA, Clinical Camel achieves state-of-the-art performance across medical benchmarks among openly available medical LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T23:07:09Z)

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.