<p>While large language models (LLMs) achieve near-perfect scores on medical licensing exams, these evaluations inadequately reflect the complexity and diversity of real-world clinical practice. Here we introduce MedHELM, an extensible evaluation framework with three contributions. First, a clinician-validated taxonomy organizing medical AI applications into five categories that mirror real clinical tasks—clinical decision support (diagnostic decisions, treatment planning), clinical note generation (visit documentation, procedure reports), patient communication (education materials, care instructions), medical research (literature analysis, clinical data analysis) and administration (scheduling, workflow coordination). These encompass 22 subcategories and 121 specific tasks reflecting daily medical practice. Second, a comprehensive benchmark suite of 37 evaluations covering all subcategories. Third, systematic comparison of nine frontier LLMs—Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, DeepSeek R1, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 2.0 Flash, GPT-4o, GPT-4o mini, Llama 3.3 and o3-mini—using an automated LLM-jury evaluation method. Our LLM-jury uses multiple AI evaluators to assess model outputs against expert-defined criteria. Advanced reasoning models (DeepSeek R1, o3-mini) demonstrated superior performance with win rates of 66%, although Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved comparable results at 15% lower computational cost. These results not only highlight current model capabilities but also demonstrate how MedHELM could enable evidence-based selection of medical AI systems for healthcare applications.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Holistic evaluation of large language models for medical tasks with MedHELM

  • Suhana Bedi,
  • Hejie Cui,
  • Miguel Fuentes,
  • Alyssa Unell,
  • Michael Wornow,
  • Juan M. Banda,
  • Nikesh Kotecha,
  • Timothy Keyes,
  • Yifan Mai,
  • Mert Oez,
  • Hao Qiu,
  • Shrey Jain,
  • Leonardo Schettini,
  • Mehr Kashyap,
  • Jason Alan Fries,
  • Akshay Swaminathan,
  • Philip Chung,
  • Fateme Nateghi Haredasht,
  • Ivan Lopez,
  • Asad Aali,
  • Gabriel Tse,
  • Ashwin Nayak,
  • Shivam Vedak,
  • Sneha S. Jain,
  • Birju Patel,
  • Oluseyi Fayanju,
  • Shreya Shah,
  • Ethan Goh,
  • Dong-han Yao,
  • Brian Soetikno,
  • Eduardo Reis,
  • Sergios Gatidis,
  • Vasu Divi,
  • Robson Capasso,
  • Rachna Saralkar,
  • Chia-Chun Chiang,
  • Jenelle Jindal,
  • Tho Pham,
  • Faraz Ghoddusi,
  • Steven Lin,
  • Albert S. Chiou,
  • Hyo Jung Hong,
  • Mohana Roy,
  • Michael F. Gensheimer,
  • Hinesh Patel,
  • Kevin Schulman,
  • Dev Dash,
  • Danton Char,
  • Lance Downing,
  • Francois Grolleau,
  • Kameron Black,
  • Bethel Mieso,
  • Aydin Zahedivash,
  • Wen-wai Yim,
  • Harshita Sharma,
  • Tony Lee,
  • Hannah Kirsch,
  • Jennifer Lee,
  • Nerissa Ambers,
  • Carlene Lugtu,
  • Aditya Sharma,
  • Bilal Mawji,
  • Alex Alekseyev,
  • Vicky Zhou,
  • Vikas Kakkar,
  • Jarrod Helzer,
  • Anurang Revri,
  • Yair Bannett,
  • Roxana Daneshjou,
  • Jonathan Chen,
  • Emily Alsentzer,
  • Keith Morse,
  • Nirmal Ravi,
  • Nima Aghaeepour,
  • Vanessa Kennedy,
  • Akshay Chaudhari,
  • Thomas Wang,
  • Sanmi Koyejo,
  • Matthew P. Lungren,
  • Eric Horvitz,
  • Percy Liang,
  • Michael A. Pfeffer,
  • Nigam H. Shah

摘要

While large language models (LLMs) achieve near-perfect scores on medical licensing exams, these evaluations inadequately reflect the complexity and diversity of real-world clinical practice. Here we introduce MedHELM, an extensible evaluation framework with three contributions. First, a clinician-validated taxonomy organizing medical AI applications into five categories that mirror real clinical tasks—clinical decision support (diagnostic decisions, treatment planning), clinical note generation (visit documentation, procedure reports), patient communication (education materials, care instructions), medical research (literature analysis, clinical data analysis) and administration (scheduling, workflow coordination). These encompass 22 subcategories and 121 specific tasks reflecting daily medical practice. Second, a comprehensive benchmark suite of 37 evaluations covering all subcategories. Third, systematic comparison of nine frontier LLMs—Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, DeepSeek R1, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 2.0 Flash, GPT-4o, GPT-4o mini, Llama 3.3 and o3-mini—using an automated LLM-jury evaluation method. Our LLM-jury uses multiple AI evaluators to assess model outputs against expert-defined criteria. Advanced reasoning models (DeepSeek R1, o3-mini) demonstrated superior performance with win rates of 66%, although Claude 3.5 Sonnet achieved comparable results at 15% lower computational cost. These results not only highlight current model capabilities but also demonstrate how MedHELM could enable evidence-based selection of medical AI systems for healthcare applications.