Reasoning in Real World Clinical Care: Why Large Language Models Are Not Yet Safe for Autonomous Clinical Decision Support

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.28677v1
• Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 07:12:46 GMT
• Title: Reasoning in Real World Clinical Care: Why Large Language Models Are Not Yet Safe for Autonomous Clinical Decision Support
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 1.4678996144709464
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: LLM now pass medical licensing examinations and, in curated cases, can rival physicians at diagnostic reasoning. These developments have accelerated the use of LLMs for symptom assessment and clinical decision support in diagnostic and treatment guidance, administrative documentation, and rules-based alert enhancement. This Perspective concerns the most consequential of these applications: the autonomous triage of self-presenting, undifferentiated patients, with little or no clinician in the loop. For that task, the evidence of safety does not yet exist. The gap is not in medical knowledge but in the fidelity of clinical evaluation: 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. Safe triage is not the selection of the most likely diagnosis; it is a sequential decision under asymmetric cost, in which the single catastrophic miss outweighs many false alarms, and the decisive signal may be one the patient has not volunteered - and that the model has not been trained to seek. The core deficit is therefore one of information gathering under uncertainty. Under incomplete histories, LLM systems may fail to show the behaviors safe triage requires: broadening the differential; seeking the missing red flag; lowering the threshold for escalation; deferring judgement until sufficient information is obtained; and escalating concern where high-harm diagnoses remain unexcluded. These modes of failure for LLMs can be difficult to detect considering that evaluations to date often use complete, well-curated, confidence-gated simulations. The application of LLMs under these conditions may be amplified by assistant-like behaviors and positive bias, including credulity, agreeableness, and miscalibration - when these are not constrained by clinical triage logic.

Related papers

• When Confidence Fails: Overconfidence in LLMs under Uncertainty and Missing Clinical Information [14.659028787864996]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance in medical question answering and clinical reasoning tasks.<n>We conduct a behavioral analysis of LLMs under clinical information uncertainty.<n>We observe significant variation across models in their ability to abstain when the correct answer is unavailable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-10T03:28:46Z)
• Possible or Definite? A Benchmark for Evaluating Diagnostic Uncertainty Preservation in Clinical Text [0.28037951156321367]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for clinical text tasks such as summarization and revision.<n>In clinical practice, phrases such as possible pneumonia'' communicate the strength of available evidence.<n> Altering these uncertainty expressions can change the clinical meaning entirely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T20:30:53Z)
• When Large Language Models Fail in Healthcare: Evaluating Sensitivity to Prompt Variations [1.0152838128195467]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in healthcare for tasks such as clinical question answering, diagnosis support, and report summarization.<n>Despite their promise, these models remain highly sensitive to subtle prompt perturbations, both lexical and syntactic, posing serious risks in safety-critical clinical applications.<n>We categorize perturbations into natural and adversarial types and examine their effect on model consistency, accuracy, and reliability in clinical reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-05T13:07:11Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• CURA: Clinical Uncertainty Risk Alignment for Language Model-Based Risk Prediction [10.129412789850239]
  We propose a framework that aligns clinical LM-based risk estimates and uncertainty with both individual error likelihoods and cohort-level ambiguities.<n>Experiments on MIMIC-IV clinical risk prediction tasks show that CURA consistently improves calibration metrics without substantially compromising discrimination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-16T05:58:37Z)
• Benchmarking Multi-turn Medical Diagnosis: Hold, Lure, and Self-Correction [72.89352076103889]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-06T00:23:10Z)
• ClinDet-Bench: Beyond Abstention, Evaluating Judgment Determinability of LLMs in Clinical Decision-Making [38.53727520114093]
  We develop ClinDet-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating determinability under incomplete information.<n>We find that recent large language models (LLMs) fail to identify determinability under incomplete information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-26T09:03:41Z)
• Timely Clinical Diagnosis through Active Test Selection [49.091903570068155]
  We propose ACTMED (Adaptive Clinical Test selection via Model-based Experimental Design) to better emulate real-world diagnostic reasoning.<n>LLMs act as flexible simulators, generating plausible patient state distributions and supporting belief updates without requiring structured, task-specific training data.<n>We evaluate ACTMED on real-world datasets and show it can optimize test selection to improve diagnostic accuracy, interpretability, and resource use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T18:10:45Z)
• 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)
• Uncertainty-Based Abstention in LLMs Improves Safety and Reduces Hallucinations [63.330182403615886]
  A major barrier towards the practical deployment of large language models (LLMs) is their lack of reliability. Three situations where this is particularly apparent are correctness, hallucinations when given unanswerable questions, and safety. In all three cases, models should ideally abstain from responding, much like humans, whose ability to understand uncertainty makes us refrain from answering questions we don't know.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T23:56:38Z)
• Towards Causality-Aware Inferring: A Sequential Discriminative Approach for Medical Diagnosis [142.90770786804507]
  Medical diagnosis assistant (MDA) aims to build an interactive diagnostic agent to sequentially inquire about symptoms for discriminating diseases. This work attempts to address these critical issues in MDA by taking advantage of the causal diagram. We propose a propensity-based patient simulator to effectively answer unrecorded inquiry by drawing knowledge from the other records.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-14T02:05:54Z)

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.