Fully Open Meditron: An Auditable Pipeline for Clinical LLMs

Deploying Large Language Models (LLMs) in high-stakes clinical settings remains limited by structural hallucinations, weak deterministic reasoning over tabular patient data, and omissions in vector retrieval. This paper presents the architecture and validation of Medi-Gemma, a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) for wound pathology triage and workflow automation. The platform introduces a decoupled framework that separates clinical perception from data orchestration while preserving traceable reasoning. Medi-Gemma uses a multi-stage pipeline coordinated by a centralized ClinicalOrchestrator. Data requests are handled without generative inference by a DataManager that cleans unstructured Electronic Medical Record (EMR) files through type coercion. Natural language queries are processed by a hierarchical IntentRouter, which routes requests to deterministic analytics paths executed by a PandasQueryEngine or to patient-specific reasoning managed by a ClinicalRAGEngine using a CPU-optimized vector store. A key contribution is the Ground Truth Injection Module, which intercepts patient-specific queries, extracts numeric identification tokens, queries the structured dataframe via Pandas, retrieves the latest validated clinical state, and embeds this snapshot as an overriding context block in the LLM prompt before generation. Safety compliance is enforced by a deterministic ProtocolManager that maps clinical terminology to fixed evidence-based risk pathways, while a SafetyVerifier phrase filter prevents output rule violations. Validation shows that this architecture eliminates semantic context drift, prevents database compilation crashes, and improves factual adherence to backend clinical repositories. These results support Medi-Gemma as a safer pattern for LLM-based clinical decision support where structured data fidelity, retrieval grounding, and deterministic safeguards are essential.

Open-response evaluation provides stronger clinical validity than multiple-choice benchmarks but creates a scoring bottleneck that motivates automated LLM-asa-Judge approaches. Whether such evaluators replicate clinical calibration and caution, however, remains untested. We introduce MedQADE, the first standardised open-response clinical benchmark for German, a major clinical language lacking native evaluation infrastructure, comprising 3,800 items annotated by ten practising physicians and nine Large Language Model (LLM) evaluators. The top-performing evaluator model, Gemini 3 Flash, reached alignment consistent with the physician ceiling (\k{appa} = 0.694 vs. \k{appa} = 0.709), though wide confidence intervals limit interpretation. Despite this statistical alignment, automated evaluators exhibited near-absent clinical metacognition: physicians scaled abstention with item difficulty, while frontier models assigned definitive scores in every case. We additionally quantified systematic lineage-dependent biases, where models preferentially scored architectural siblings, an effect independent of language. These results show that statistical alignment does not ensure clinical caution, and that evaluator independence requires explicit verification.

Evaluating large language models (LLMs) for medical applications remains challenging due to benchmark saturation, limited data accessibility, and insufficient coverage of relevant tasks. Existing suites have either saturated, heavily depend on restricted datasets, or lack comprehensive model coverage. We introduce Medmarks, a fully open-source evaluation suite with 30 benchmarks spanning question answering, information extraction, medical calculations, and open-ended clinical reasoning. We perform a systematic evaluation of 61 models across 71 configurations using verifiable metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge. Our results show that frontier reasoning models (Gemini 3 Pro Preview, GPT-5.1, & GPT-5.2) achieve the highest performance across both benchmarks, most frontier proprietary models are significantly more token efficient than open-weight alternatives, medically fine-tuned models outperform their generalist counterparts, and that models are susceptible to answer-order bias (particularly smaller models and Grok 4). A subset of our evals (Medmarks-T) can be directly used as reinforcement learning environments to post-train LLMs for medical reasoning. Code is available at https://github.com/MedARC-AI/Medmarks