Related papers: Clinical Reasoning in the Age of AI: Longitudinal Cognition and Human-AI Collaboration

Clinical Reasoning in the Age of AI: Longitudinal Cognition and Human-AI Collaboration

URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.08442v1
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2026 03:51:15 GMT
Title: Clinical Reasoning in the Age of AI: Longitudinal Cognition and Human-AI Collaboration
Abstract summary: Understanding how doctors reason through clinical problems in real-world settings is critical for design of effective AI reasoning systems.<n>This study offers a unified framework for understanding clinical reasoning as a context-sensitive, temporally extended process.
Score: 0.7588418803784354
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Abstract: As physicians turn to AI-powered systems to help meet the dual demands of speed and care quality, they are met with hallucinations and sycophancy. Understanding how doctors reason through clinical problems in real-world settings is critical for design of effective AI reasoning systems. While recent advances in medical AI have emphasized performance benchmarks and diagnostic accuracy, comparatively little attention has been paid to the structure of clinicians' reasoning processes as they unfold over time, e.g., how they interact with electronic health records and operate under conditions of uncertainty and constraint. This study provides a comprehensive, empirically-grounded account of clinical reasoning and its relationship to current AI-mediated workflows through a mixed-methods design that combines qualitative interviews with structured survey data. Findings indicate that current AI systems are primarily deployed for encounter-level tasks such as documentation and summarization, and only partially align with physicians' underlying reasoning processes. In particular, AI-generated representations often omit temporal or interpretive structures central to clinical decision-making, while core aspects of reasoning, especially those spanning multiple encounters, remain largely implicit and physician-driven. By integrating fine-grained qualitative insights with broader quantitative patterns, this study offers a unified framework for understanding clinical reasoning as a context-sensitive, temporally extended process and identifies key mismatches between clinician cognition and current AI design. These results provide concrete directions for the development of AI systems that more effectively align with and augment real-world clinical reasoning.

Related papers

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)
Augmenting Clinical Decision-Making with an Interactive and Interpretable AI Copilot: A Real-World User Study with Clinicians in Nephrology and Obstetrics [36.981753143345664]
We present AICare, an interactive and interpretable AI copilot for collaborative clinical decision-making.<n>By analyzing longitudinal electronic health records, AICare grounds dynamic risk predictions in scrutable visualizations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-31T13:41:32Z)
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)
Human-AI Co-design for Clinical Prediction Models [8.099095493749868]
We introduce HACHI, an iterative human-in-the-loop framework that uses AI agents to accelerate the development of fully interpretable clinical prediction models.<n>In two real-world prediction tasks, HACHI outperforms existing approaches, surfaces new clinically relevant concepts, and improves model generalizability across clinical sites and time periods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-14T02:04:34Z)
Automated Construction of Medical Indicator Knowledge Graphs Using Retrieval Augmented Large Language Models [8.095858876360577]
We propose an automated framework that combines retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with large language models (LLMs) to construct medical indicator knowledge graphs.<n>The resulting knowledge graphs can be integrated into intelligent diagnosis and question-answering systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-17T16:00:42Z)
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)
RAD: Towards Trustworthy Retrieval-Augmented Multi-modal Clinical Diagnosis [56.373297358647655]
Retrieval-Augmented Diagnosis (RAD) is a novel framework that injects external knowledge into multimodal models directly on downstream tasks.<n>RAD operates through three key mechanisms: retrieval and refinement of disease-centered knowledge from multiple medical sources, a guideline-enhanced contrastive loss transformer, and a dual decoder.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-24T10:36:14Z)
Medical Reasoning in the Era of LLMs: A Systematic Review of Enhancement Techniques and Applications [59.721265428780946]
Large Language Models (LLMs) in medicine have enabled impressive capabilities, yet a critical gap remains in their ability to perform systematic, transparent, and verifiable reasoning.<n>This paper provides the first systematic review of this emerging field.<n>We propose a taxonomy of reasoning enhancement techniques, categorized into training-time strategies and test-time mechanisms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-01T14:41:31Z)
Towards Next-Generation Medical Agent: How o1 is Reshaping Decision-Making in Medical Scenarios [46.729092855387165]
We study the choice of the backbone LLM for medical AI agents, which is the foundation for the agent's overall reasoning and action generation.<n>Our findings demonstrate o1's ability to enhance diagnostic accuracy and consistency, paving the way for smarter, more responsive AI tools.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-16T18:19:53Z)
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)
Informing clinical assessment by contextualizing post-hoc explanations of risk prediction models in type-2 diabetes [50.8044927215346]
We consider a comorbidity risk prediction scenario and focus on contexts regarding the patients clinical state. We employ several state-of-the-art LLMs to present contexts around risk prediction model inferences and evaluate their acceptability. Our paper is one of the first end-to-end analyses identifying the feasibility and benefits of contextual explanations in a real-world clinical use case.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-11T18:07:11Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.