Evaluating Multimodal LLMs for Inpatient Diagnosis: Real-World Performance, Safety, and Cost Across Ten Frontier Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.16980v1
• Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2026 12:42:57 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Multimodal LLMs for Inpatient Diagnosis: Real-World Performance, Safety, and Cost Across Ten Frontier Models
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for diagnostic support.<n>Few evaluations use real-world multimodal inpatient data, particularly in low and middle-income country (LMIC) public hospitals.<n>We conducted VALID, a retrospective evaluation of 539 multimodal inpatient cases from a tertiary public hospital in South Africa.
• Score: 0.7857924499207116
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for diagnostic support, but few evaluations use real-world multimodal inpatient data, particularly in low and middle-income country (LMIC) public hospitals. Methods: We conducted VALID, a retrospective evaluation of 539 multimodal inpatient cases from a tertiary public hospital in South Africa. Inputs included radiology imaging (CT, MRI, CXR) and reports, laboratory results, clinical notes, and vital signs. Expert panels adjudicated 300 cases (balanced and discordant subsets) to establish ground truth diagnoses, differentials, and reasoning. Ten multimodal LLMs generated zero-shot outputs. A calibrated three-model LLM Jury scored all outputs and routine ward diagnoses across diagnostic accuracy, differential quality, reasoning, and patient safety (>10,000 evaluations). Primary outcomes were composite scores ($S_3$, $S_4$) and win rates. Results: (i) LLM performance was tightly clustered (<15% variation) despite large cost differences; low-cost models performed comparably to top models. (ii) All LLMs significantly outperformed routine ward diagnoses on average diagnostic and safety scores. (iii) Top performance was achieved by GPT-5.1, followed by Gemini models. (vi) Adding radiology reports improved performance by 6%. (v) Diagnostic and reasoning scores were highly correlated ($ρ= 0.85$). (vi) Output rates varied (65-100%) due to input constraints. Results were robust across subsets and evaluation design. Conclusions: Across a real-world LMIC dataset, multimodal LLMs showed similar diagnostic performance despite large cost differences and outperformed routine care on average safety metrics. Affordability, robustness, and deployment constraints may outweigh marginal performance differences in LMIC settings.

Related papers

• MedDialBench: Benchmarking LLM Diagnostic Robustness under Parametric Adversarial Patient Behaviors [3.346370180968566]
  We introduce MedDialBench, a benchmark enabling controlled, dose-response characterization of how individual patient behavior dimensions affect diagnostic robustness.<n>It decomposes patient behavior into five dimensions -- Logic Consistency, Health Cognition, Expression Style, Disclosure, and Attitude -- each with graded severity levels and case-specific behavioral scripts.<n>This controlled factorial design enables graded sensitivity analysis, dose-response profiling, and cross-dimension interaction detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T09:09:08Z)
• Cerebra: A Multidisciplinary AI Board for Multimodal Dementia Characterization and Risk Assessment [56.62016795093786]
  Cerebra is an interactive multi-agent AI team that coordinates specialized agents for EHR, clinical notes, and medical imaging analysis.<n>It supports privacy-preserving deployment by operating on structured representations and remains robust when modalities are incomplete.<n>Cerebra significantly improved expert performance, increasing accuracy by 17.5 percentage points in prospective dementia risk estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T05:46:45Z)
• Med-RewardBench: Benchmarking Reward Models and Judges for Medical Multimodal Large Language Models [57.73472878679636]
  We introduce Med-RewardBench, the first benchmark specifically designed to evaluate medical reward models and judges.<n>Med-RewardBench features a multimodal dataset spanning 13 organ systems and 8 clinical departments, with 1,026 expert-annotated cases.<n>A rigorous three-step process ensures high-quality evaluation data across six clinically critical dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-29T08:58:39Z)
• A Multi-Pass Large Language Model Framework for Precise and Efficient Radiology Report Error Detection [1.8604092379196109]
  The positive predictive value (PPV) of large language model (LLM)-based proofreading for radiology reports is limited due to the low error prevalence.<n>A three-pass LLM framework significantly enhanced PPV and reduced operational costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T04:02:29Z)
• Look & Mark: Leveraging Radiologist Eye Fixations and Bounding boxes in Multimodal Large Language Models for Chest X-ray Report Generation [2.821158017021184]
  Look & Mark (L&M) is a novel grounding fixation strategy that integrates radiologist eye fixations (Look) and bounding box annotations (Mark)<n>General-purpose models also benefit from L&M combined with in-context learning, with LLaVA-OV achieving an 87.3% clinical average performance (C.AVG)-the highest among all models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T10:54:40Z)
• MedHELM: Holistic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Medical Tasks [47.486705282473984]
  Large language models (LLMs) achieve near-perfect scores on medical exams.<n>These evaluations inadequately reflect complexity and diversity of real-world clinical practice.<n>We introduce MedHELM, an evaluation framework for assessing LLM performance for medical tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T22:55:49Z)
• ChestX-Reasoner: Advancing Radiology Foundation Models with Reasoning through Step-by-Step Verification [57.22053411719822]
  ChestX-Reasoner is a radiology diagnosis MLLM designed to leverage process supervision mined directly from clinical reports.<n>Our two-stage training framework combines supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning guided by process rewards to better align model reasoning with clinical standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-29T16:48:23Z)
• 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)
• 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)

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.