This article aims to provide a pragmatic basis for designing and executing rigorous evaluations of healthcare LLMs by describing underlying concepts and potential pitfalls, while emphasizing the importance of aligning evaluation methods with the research question.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have a growing range of applications in medicine, and their evaluation is critical for ensuring they provide benefit and not harm. This evaluation can be more challenging than traditional machine learning for many reasons, including probabilistic and open-ended outputs, and behavior that shifts with prompt design and accumulated context. This review covers four key areas of LLM evaluation: principles of study design, statistical methods, capability evaluation and clinical context evaluation. Capability evaluation considers different benchmarks, including multiple-choice, agentic and multi-turn benchmarks, alongside operational metrics like token usage. Clinical context evaluation addresses establishing accuracy of free text outputs, such as human review and LLM-as-a-judge, and clinical trial approaches. Across sections, we describe underlying concepts and potential pitfalls, while emphasizing the importance of aligning evaluation methods with the research question. Together, this article aims to provide a pragmatic basis for designing and executing rigorous evaluations of healthcare LLMs.
With the increasing application of large language models (LLMs) in the medical domain, evaluating these models' performance using benchmark datasets has become crucial. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of various benchmark datasets used in medical LLM tasks. These datasets span multiple modalities including t...
L. K. Yan, Qian Niu, Ming Li et al.· Medicine Advances· 32 citations· ⚡1
HIVMedQA is developed, a clinician-curated benchmark of HIV-related open-ended medical question-answer pairs spanning basic knowledge, clinical reasoning, complex patient vignettes, and bias-modified scenarios that provides a structured benchmark for evaluating LLMs in HIV clinical decision support.
Gonzalo Cardenal-Antolin, J. Fellay, Bashkim Jaha et al.· Communications Medicine· 1 citation
It is suggested that the reliability of health care LLM reliability is difficult to evaluate adequately using a single universal standard, and future evaluations of health care LLM reliability need to be guided by standardized evaluation frameworks that reflect domain-specific contexts.
Euijun Yang, S. Ko, Hyekyung Woo· Journal of Medical Internet...· 0 citations
It is demonstrated that modern LLMs with reasoning capabilities can effectively support real-time clinical evidence synthesis without task-specific fine-tuning, offering a pathway toward scalable automated systems for clinical trial interpretation that could substantially reduce the evidence-to-practice gap in medical...
Shobanapriyan Chandrasegaran, Amal Htait· International Conference on...· 0 citations
Although promising, LLM-based systems are not yet reliable enough for autonomous medical diagnosis, and multiple recommendations for future research are contained to ensure a high level of safety, transparency, and clinical applicability for LLMs and other AI/ML-related technologies and devices.
M. U. K. Gunawardhna, Pirunthavi Wijikumar, D. Weerasinghe· Sri Lankan Journal of Applie...· 0 citations
By tracing the evolutionary trajectories of these methodologies, this scoping review provides a mechanism-centered framework to inform responsible model development and deployment in medical settings, tailored to task complexity, data characteristics, and resource constraints.
Fang Li, Jian-Fu Li, Weiguo Cao et al.· npj Health Systems· 0 citations