Benchmarking Multi-turn Medical Diagnosis: Hold, Lure, and Self-Correction
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04325v1
- Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 00:23:10 GMT
- Title: Benchmarking Multi-turn Medical Diagnosis: Hold, Lure, and Self-Correction
- Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) achieve high accuracy in medical diagnosis when all clinical information is provided in a single turn.<n>We introduce MINT, a high-fidelity, multi-turn medical diagnosis benchmark comprising 1,035 cases.<n>We uncover three persistent behavioral patterns that significantly impact diagnostic decisions.
- Score: 72.89352076103889
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve high accuracy in medical diagnosis when all clinical information is provided in a single turn, yet how they behave under multi-turn evidence accumulation closer to real clinical reasoning remains unexplored. We introduce MINT (Medical Incremental N-Turn Benchmark), a high-fidelity, multi-turn medical diagnosis benchmark comprising 1,035 cases with clinically labeled evidence shards, controlled turn granularity, and information-preserving decomposition. Through systematic evaluation of 11 LLMs on MINT, we uncover three persistent behavioral patterns that significantly impact diagnostic decisions: (1) intent to answer, models rush to answer before sufficient evidence has been observed, with over 55% of answers committed within the first two turns; (2) self-correction, incorrect-to-correct answer revisions occur at up to 10.6 times the rate of correct-to-incorrect flips, revealing a latent capacity for self-correction that premature commitment forecloses; and (3) strong lures, clinically salient information such as laboratory results trigger premature answering even when models are explicitly instructed to wait. We translate these findings into clinically actionable guidance: deferring the diagnostic question to later turns reduces premature answering and improves accuracy at the first point of commitment by up to 62.6%, while reserving salient clinical evidence for later turns prevents a catastrophic accuracy drop of up to 23.3% caused by premature commitment. Our work provides both a controlled evaluation framework and concrete recommendations for improving the reliability of LLMs in multi-turn medical diagnosis.
Related papers
- Evaluating Multi-Turn Multimodal Diagnostic Reasoning on Challenging Real-World Clinical Cases [59.5328455571863]
ClinMM-Bench is the largest multi-turn multimodal clinical diagnostic evaluation benchmark to date.<n>It contains 1,089 challenging real-world clinical cases and 3,760 medical images across eight specialties.<n> proprietary models achieved the highest overall diagnostic accuracy, but the proportion of completely correct diagnoses remained limited.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-28T16:19:03Z) - Information-seeking failures of large language models in agentic clinical reasoning [1.0175801260973338]
Reasoning traces scored high on a clinical reasoning but decorrelated from accuracy, revealing a gap between locally coherent rationales and globally correct conclusions.<n>These findings demonstrate that the primary limitation of current models in clinical oncology is not insufficient medical knowledge but a systematic failure of information-seeking under uncertainty.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-11T12:10:33Z) - Ask Before You Diagnose: Safe-Psych, a Sequential Evaluation Benchmark for LLMs in Psychiatry [2.60905622443275]
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for decision support in healthcare.<n>Clinical evidence is often incomplete or evolving.<n>We introduce Safe-Psych, a benchmark for evaluating how LLMs handle evolving diagnostic uncertainty.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-06T08:52:45Z) - Guideline-Grounded Evidence Accumulation for High-Stakes Agent Verification [60.18369393468405]
Existing verifiers usually underperform owing to a lack of domain knowledge and limited calibration.<n>GLEAN compiles expert-curated protocols into trajectory-informed, well-calibrated correctness signals.<n>We empirically validate GLEAN with agentic clinical diagnosis across three diseases from the MIMIC-IV dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-03T09:36:43Z) - A Multi-Agent Framework for Medical AI: Leveraging Fine-Tuned GPT, LLaMA, and DeepSeek R1 for Evidence-Based and Bias-Aware Clinical Query Processing [0.4349324020366305]
Large language models (LLMs) show promise for healthcare question answering, but clinical use is limited by weak verification, insufficient evidence grounding, and unreliable confidence signalling.<n>We propose a multi-agent medical QA framework that combines complementary LLMs with evidence retrieval, uncertainty estimation, and bias checks to improve answer reliability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-15T14:17:27Z) - MedKGI: Iterative Differential Diagnosis with Medical Knowledge Graphs and Information-Guided Inquiring [39.776843923694244]
We propose MedKGI, a diagnostic framework grounded in clinical practices.<n>We show that MedKGI outperforms strong LLM baselines in both diagnostic accuracy and inquiry efficiency.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-30T12:31:53Z) - 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) - 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) - An Agentic System for Rare Disease Diagnosis with Traceable Reasoning [69.46279475491164]
We introduce DeepRare, the first rare disease diagnosis agentic system powered by a large language model (LLM)<n>DeepRare generates ranked diagnostic hypotheses for rare diseases, each accompanied by a transparent chain of reasoning.<n>The system demonstrates exceptional diagnostic performance among 2,919 diseases, achieving 100% accuracy for 1013 diseases.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-25T13:42:26Z) - Medical Reasoning in LLMs: An In-Depth Analysis of DeepSeek R1 [0.0]
This study assesses DeepSeek R1's medical reasoning against expert patterns using 100 MedQA clinical cases.<n>The model achieved 93% diagnostic accuracy, demonstrating systematic clinical judgment through differential diagnosis, guideline-based treatment selection, and integration of patient-specific factors.<n>Error analysis of seven incorrect cases revealed persistent limitations: anchoring bias, challenges reconciling conflicting data, insufficient exploration of alternatives, overthinking, knowledge gaps, and premature prioritization of definitive treatment over intermediate care.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-27T09:18:08Z) - Enhancing Diagnostic Accuracy through Multi-Agent Conversations: Using Large Language Models to Mitigate Cognitive Bias [5.421033429862095]
Cognitive biases in clinical decision-making significantly contribute to errors in diagnosis and suboptimal patient outcomes.
This study explores the role of large language models in mitigating these biases through the utilization of a multi-agent framework.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-26T01:35:50Z)
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.