Electronic Health Records

Large vision-language models (VLMs) demonstrate strong performance in medical image understanding, but frequently generate clinically plausible yet incorrect statements, raising significant safety concerns. Existing medical hallucination benchmarks primarily focus on 2D imaging with one-shot diagnostic questions, offering limited insight into whether predictions are grounded in correct localization and abnormality identification, allowing critical reasoning errors to remain hidden behind seemingly correct diagnoses. We introduce Med-StepBench, the first large-scale benchmark for step-wise hallucination detection in 3D oncological PET/CT, comprising over 12,000 images and more than 1,000,000 image-statement pairs across volumetric and multi-view 2D data, which decomposes clinical reasoning into four expert-designed diagnostic stages. Using clinician-verified annotations, we perform the first step-level evaluation of general-purpose and medical VLMs, revealing systematic failure modes obscured by aggregate accuracy metrics. Furthermore, we show that current VLMs are highly susceptible to adversarial yet clinically plausible intermediate explanations, which significantly amplify hallucinations despite contradictory visual evidence. Together, our findings highlight fundamental limitations in grounding multi-step clinical reasoning and establish Med-StepBench as a rigorous benchmark for developing safer and more reliable medical VLMs.

ML models in healthcare are typically evaluated using curated real-world EHR data. A key limitation of such evaluations is that they may fail to assess the robustness of ML models to changes in the data at deployment, which is a common issue because EHR data used for ML model development cannot capture all such changes. Mass casualty incidents (MCIs) caused by disasters are critical instances where this will be an issue, as they induce rare, uncertain, and novel changes to routine system conditions. Because real-world EHR data from MCIs are often limited or unavailable, assessing ML robustness under such conditions before deployment remains challenging. Here, we propose an agent-based modelling approach for generating synthetic EHR data to evaluate the robustness of ML models under MCI scenarios. We use real-world EHR data to develop and calibrate an agent-based model (ABM) of an emergency department (ED) that explicitly models patient arrivals, resource capacity, and clinical workflow. By changing these system conditions to reflect plausible MCI scenarios, the ED model generates synthetic versions of the real-world EHR data that exhibit shifts in system behaviour. Using these synthetic data, we test ML models for predicting length of stay. We observed consistent declines in recall under MCI conditions relative to baseline system conditions, resulting in an increase in the number of patients with prolonged length of stay that were missed by the ML models. These results highlight the impact of changes in system conditions on patient outcomes, EHR data, and ML model performance. Our work establishes ABM-based synthetic EHR data generation as a proactive and systematic approach for evaluating the robustness of ML models under MCI or other system conditions not captured in real-world EHR data, supporting the safer and more effective deployment of ML models in healthcare systems.

Representation learning in electronic health records (EHR) has largely followed paradigms inherited from natural language processing, relying on sequence modeling and reconstruction based objectives that treat clinical labels as ground truth. However, real world clinical supervision is inherently weak, arising from heterogeneous, noisy, and institution specific labeling processes such as billing codes, heuristic phenotypes, and incomplete annotations. In this work, we propose WISTERIA, a weakly supervised representation learning framework that models labels as stochastic observations of an underlying latent clinical state. Instead of optimizing against a single supervision signal, WISTERIA constructs multiple weak supervision operators and learns representations by enforcing consistency across their induced label distributions. This multi view formulation induces an implicit denoising mechanism, allowing the model to recover clinically meaningful structure by reconciling disagreement between noisy labelers. We further incorporate ontology aware regularization in the label space to impose semantic structure over supervision signals. Empirically, WISTERIA improves predictive performance across standard EHR benchmarks, demonstrates strong robustness to label noise, and exhibits superior cross institutional generalization compared to sequence based pretraining objectives. These results suggest that explicitly modeling the supervision process rather than treating labels as fixed targets provides a more appropriate inductive bias for learning robust and clinically meaningful representations from EHR data.

Medicine is rife with high-stakes uncertainty. Doctors routinely make clinical judgments and decisions that juggle many fundamental unknowns, like predictions about what might be causing a patients' symptoms or decisions about what treatment to try next. Despite increasing interest in developing AI systems that aid or even replace doctors in clinical settings, current systems struggle with calibrated reasoning under uncertainty, and are often deeply opaque about their reasoning. We propose a framework for AI systems that can make practically useful but formally transparent clinical predictions under uncertainty. Given a clinical situation, our framework (MedMSA) uses language models to retrieve relevant prior knowledge, but constructs a formal probabilistic model to support calibrated and verifiable inferences under uncertainty. We show how an initial proof-of-concept of this framework can be used for differential diagnosis, producing an uncertainty-weighted list of potential diagnoses that could explain a patients' symptoms, and discuss future applications and directions for applying this framework more generally for safe clinical collaborations.

Clinical reasoning agents based on large language models (LLMs) aim to automate tasks such as intensive care unit (ICU) monitoring and patient state tracking from electronic health records (EHRs). Existing systems typically rely on manually curated clinical tools or skills for concepts such as sepsis detection and organ failure assessment. However, maintaining these tool libraries requires substantial expert effort, while zero-shot querying or code generation often produces inefficient and unreliable reasoning chains, especially under institution-specific clinical policies. We introduce CodeClinic, a benchmark built on MIMIC-IV for evaluating whether LLM agents can synthesize and compose reusable clinical skills instead of relying on fixed toolboxes. The benchmark contains two complementary tasks: longitudinal ICU surveillance and compositional information seeking. The longitudinal setting simulates monitoring patient trajectories with structured decisions every four hours across 25 findings and eight clinical families, while the compositional setting spans 63k instances across 259 tasks in nine domains and is stratified by compositional dependency depth to evaluate increasingly complex multi-step reasoning. We further propose an offline autoformalization pipeline that converts natural-language clinical guidelines into reusable and verified Python skill libraries through iterative LLM refinement. Compared with zero-shot code generation, the resulting libraries improve consistency while reducing per-query token usage by up to 40%.

Large language models (LLMs) have saturated standard medical benchmarks that test factual recall, yet their ability to perform higher-order reasoning, such as synthesizing evidence from multiple sources, remains critically under-explored. To address this gap, we introduce MedMeta, the first benchmark designed to evaluate an LLM's ability to generate conclusions from medical meta-analyses using only the abstracts of cited studies. MedMeta comprises 81 meta-analyses from PubMed (2018--2025) and evaluates models using two distinct workflows: a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (Golden-RAG) setting with ground-truth abstracts, and a Parametric-only approach relying on internal knowledge. Our evaluation framework is validated by a well-structured analysis showing our LLM-as-a-judge protocol strongly aligns with human expert ratings, as evidenced by high Pearson's r correlation (0.81) and Bland-Altman analysis revealing negligible systematic bias, establishing it as a reliable proxy for scalable evaluation. Our findings underscore the critical importance of information grounding: the Golden-RAG workflow consistently and significantly outperforms the Parametric-only approach across models. In contrast, the benefits of domain-specific fine-tuning are marginal and largely neutralized when external material is provided. Furthermore, stress tests show that all models, regardless of architecture, fail to identify and reject negated evidence, highlighting a critical vulnerability in current RAG systems. Notably, even under ideal RAG conditions, current LLMs achieve only slightly above-average performance (~2.7/5.0). MedMeta provides a challenging new benchmark for evidence synthesis and demonstrates that for clinical applications, developing robust RAG systems is a more promising direction than model specialization alone.

Inpatient clinical reasoning is a sequential decision under partial observability: the clinician sees the admission so far and must choose the next action whose downstream consequences are not yet visible. Existing clinical-LLM evaluations and RL rewards signals collapse this into closed-form retrieval, clinical journey leakage, or unanchored LLM-as-judge scoring. We introduce CLR-voyance, a framework that reformulates inpatient reasoning as a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) and supervises it with rewards that are simultaneously outcome-grounded and clinician-validated. We instantiate the formulation as CLR-POMDP, which partitions successful patient journeys into a policy-visible past and an oracle-only future. Using the past information, an oracle LLM generates a case-specific query-answer pair, and the first adaptive rubric for clinical reasoning which is verifiable in the future of the patient journey. These rubrics are used for both post-training and evaluation of models for inpatient clinical reasoning. We post-train Qwen3-8B and MedGemma-4B with GRPO followed by model merging, yielding state-of-the-art inpatient clinical reasoning while retaining generalist capabilities. CLR-voyance-8B achieves 84.91% on CLR-POMDP, ahead of frontier medical reasoning models like GPT-5 (77.83%) and MedGemma-27B (66.66%) and has comparable or better performance on existing medical benchmarks. To ensure a clinically meaningful setting, we conduct a large-scale clinician alignment study, where physicians curate per-case rubrics, grade candidate responses, and provide blinded pairwise preferences of model reasoning. This study provides insights on clinical LLM-as-a-judge and clinical preference-model selection, which can inform the community at large. CLR-voyance has been deployed for 6+ months at a partner public hospital, drafting thousands of reasoning-heavy inpatient notes.

Clinical reports are often fragmented across healthcare institutions because privacy regulations and data silos limit direct information sharing. When patients seek care at a different hospital, they often carry paper or scanned reports from prior visits. This hinders EHR integration and longitudinal review, and downstream applications that depend on more complete patient records, such as patient management, follow-up care, real-world studies, and clinical-trial matching. Although OCR can digitize such reports, reliable extraction remains challenging because clinical documents are heterogeneous, OCR text is noisy, and many healthcare settings require low-cost on-premise deployment. We formulate this problem as canonical key-conditioned extractive question answering over OCR-derived clinical reports. Because the key fields are neither fixed nor known in advance, the key space is open. We maintain a canonical key inventory through iterative key mining, normalization, clustering, and lightweight human verification, and introduce key coverage as a metric to quantify inventory completeness. Using a 0.2B BERT-based model, experiments on real-world reports from more than 20 hospitals show performance improves monotonically with key coverage. The model achieves F1 scores of 0.839 and 0.893 under exact match and boundary-tolerant matching, respectively, once the Top-90 canonical keys are covered. These results show that key coverage is a dominant factor for end-to-end performance. At Top-90 coverage, our model outperforms a fine-tuned Qwen3-0.6B baseline under exact match. Although our annotated corpus is Chinese, the method relies on the language-agnostic key-value organization of semi-structured clinical reports and can be adapted to other settings given an appropriate canonical key inventory and alias mapping.

We develop and evaluate a data-driven approach for detecting unusual (anomalous) patient-management decisions using past patient cases stored in electronic health records (EHRs). Our hypothesis is that a patient-management decision that is unusual with respect to past patient care may be due to an error and that it is worthwhile to generate an alert if such a decision is encountered. We evaluate this hypothesis using data obtained from EHRs of 4486 post-cardiac surgical patients and a subset of 222 alerts generated from the data. We base the evaluation on the opinions of a panel of experts. The results of the study support our hypothesis that the outlier-based alerting can lead to promising true alert rates. We observed true alert rates that ranged from 25% to 66% for a variety of patient-management actions, with 66% corresponding to the strongest outliers.

We propose a new class of waveform foundation models that departs from conventional sequence based representations by modeling physiological time series as realizations of latent event processes. Rather than treating signals as collections of local tokens or patches, our approach assumes that clinically meaningful structure arises from temporally extended, interacting events whose boundaries and dynamics are not directly observed. To capture this structure, we introduce a self supervised learning framework that enforces consistency across stochastic segmentations and time frequency projections of the same waveform, encouraging representations that are invariant to signal level perturbations while preserving event level organization. The resulting model combines a segmentation aware encoder with a latent interaction operator that captures dependencies among inferred events, and naturally extends to multimodal settings by aligning modalities through shared event representations. Across a range of physiological benchmarks, including arrhythmia classification, hemodynamic prediction, and waveform retrieval, the proposed method improves performance, robustness, and label efficiency relative to strong sequence based baselines. These results suggest that shifting from signal centric to event centric representations provides a more appropriate inductive bias for modeling physiological dynamics and offers a complementary path to scaling foundation models in healthcare.

Clinical decision-making in emergency medicine demands rapid, accurate diagnoses under uncertainty. Despite benchmark progress, evidence for LLMs as interactive aids in live physician workflows remains sparse. MedSyn lets physicians iteratively query an LLM provided with the full clinical record while initially viewing only the chief complaint. Seven physicians (three seniors, four residents) completed baseline and AI-assisted sessions across 52 MIMIC-IV cases stratified by difficulty. Blinded evaluation showed residents' Hard-case correctness rose from 0.589 to 0.734; difficulty-standardised completely-correct rates confirmed a medium effect (Δ = 0.092; p = 0.071; d = 0.47). Automated metrics corroborated these gains: standardised any-match accuracy improved by 0.156 (p < 0.0001), and residents showed the largest F1 gain (Δ = 0.138; p < 0.0001). Dialogue analysis revealed expertise-dependent strategies (seniors asked targeted, hypothesis-driven questions; residents relied on broader queries) and cross-expertise concordance increased (Δ = 0.145; p < 0.0001). Interactive LLM support meaningfully enhances diagnostic reasoning.

AI models are increasingly deployed in live clinical environments where they must perform reliably across complex, high-stakes workflows that standard training and validation datasets were never designed to capture. Evaluating these systems requires benchmarks: structured combinations of tasks, datasets, and metrics that enable reproducible, comparable measurement of what a model can do. The central challenge in healthcare AI is not performance alone, but the absence of systematic methods to measure reliability, safety, and clinical relevance under real-world conditions. Most existing benchmarks test what a model knows; too few test whether it can perform reliably and without failing across the full complexity of real clinical tasks. Current benchmarks have accumulated through ad hoc dataset construction optimized for narrow task performance: frontier models achieve near-perfect scores on medical licensing examinations, but when evaluated across real clinical tasks, performance degrades sharply, scoring 0.74--0.85 on documentation, 0.61--0.76 on clinical decision support, and only 0.53--0.63 on administrative and workflow tasks \cite{medhelm}. High benchmark scores give a false sense of deployment readiness, and the gap between performance and utility widens precisely as AI systems take on more consequential clinical roles. Without a principled framework for benchmark design, the field cannot determine whether poor clinical performance reflects model limitations or failures in how performance is being measured.

Post-deployment monitoring of healthcare AI requires statistically valid, label-efficient methods, but gold-standard labels from clinician chart review are expensive. Prediction-powered inference (PPI) and active statistical inference (ASI) reduce label cost by combining a small labeled sample with abundant model predictions, but both are restricted to a single predictor, a poor fit for modern clinical pipelines that have multiple predictors of differing cost and accuracy available at inference time. We propose Active Multiple-Prediction-Powered Inference (AM-PPI), which routes each instance to a cost-appropriate predictor subset, samples gold-standard labels in proportion to the chosen subset's residual uncertainty, and reweights predictions to minimize estimator variance, all under a single deployment-time budget. AM-PPI generalizes ASI to leverage multiple predictors and extends Multiple-PPI from global per-predictor allocation to per-instance adaptive routing. We derive closed-form Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions for all three decisions and prove, via biconvexity and strong duality, that the resulting fixed point is a global optimum despite the joint problem being non-jointly-convex. We establish asymptotic normality with valid coverage, minimum-variance unbiasedness within the linear-prediction augmented inverse propensity weighted (AIPW) class, and a closed-form criterion identifying when multiple predictors help. On synthetic data and three healthcare monitoring tasks, AM-PPI produces 10 to 40 percent narrower confidence intervals (CIs) than single-predictor ASI in the budget regime where routing matters, and matches the better baseline elsewhere.

The rapid proliferation of open-source medical foundation models (FMs) raises a practical question: how well do their pre-trained representations transfer to clinically relevant but data-scarce classification tasks? Particularly in CT-based renal lesion classification, a push toward greater generalizability would be meaningful, as the field is constrained by inherently limited training data. We addressed this through a benchmark of three medical FMs on this specific task. This six-class problem spans common entities like cysts and clear cell renal cell carcinoma, alongside rare subtypes. Using a frozen feature-probing protocol, we compared FM embeddings against a handcrafted radiomics classifier and a 3D ResNet-50 trained from scratch. Models were trained on a composite dataset of 2,854 lesions and evaluated on an external test set of 234 lesions from The Cancer Imaging Archive. Our results reveal two key findings. First, FM performance (AUC 0.70-0.77) matched the from-scratch ResNet (AUC 0.72) while drastically reducing hardware demand, requiring only seconds on a CPU after feature extraction. However, the conventional radiomics baseline significantly outperformed all deep learning approaches, achieving an AUC of 0.88 (all p $\leq$ 0.002). This suggests that current generalist FM embeddings do not yet capture the fine-grained texture and shape heterogeneity driving histological subtype discrimination. Despite their potential in data-scarce settings, medical FMs did not surpass established models for renal lesion stratification, leaving radiomics as the current state-of-the-art.

Health foundation models (FMs) learn useful representations from wearable sensors, but interpreting what they encode and transferring that knowledge across modalities after training remains difficult. We present a post-training framework that decomposes frozen embeddings into interpretable directions, referred to as symbols, and use these symbols to align the embedding spaces without retraining. We evaluate the framework on three FMs for photoplethysmography (PPG) and accelerometer data, independently pretrained on ~20M minutes of unlabeled data from ~172K participants, and analyzed on a held-out cohort of 30K subjects. We find that extracted symbols associate selectively with health conditions and physiological attributes, and these associations are partially shared across modalities and architectures. Cross-modal transfer via symbols retains more than 95% of in-domain performance, is nearly symmetric across domain directions, and saturates with limited paired data, together indicating that alignment recovers a shared low-dimensional subspace rich in physiological information. Overall, these results suggest that health FM embeddings contain an interpretable symbolic organization that is shared across modalities and supports cross-domain transfer without joint training.

Most existing LLM diagnoses are evaluated on static, single-turn settings where complete patient information is provided upfront, an oversimplification of real clinical practice. We study active diagnosis: the real-life clinical process of starting from initial observation, ordering tests, interpreting results, and updating a differential diagnosis across multiple turns. Through systematic analysis, we identify three recurring failure modes in current LLMs: ungrounded test ordering, unreliable diagnostic update, and degraded multi-turn coherence. Together, these failures reveal a core deficit: existing medical training data teaches models to reason from complete information but not to act under evolving, partial evidence. To address this gap, we introduce MedAction, a tree-structured distillation pipeline that synthesizes diverse and high-quality multi-turn diagnostic trajectories via LLM-environment interaction. We propose two knowledge-graph-grounded metrics to filter trajectory quality: Disease Trajectory Consistency (DTC), which tracks whether the model's hypothesis converges toward the correct diagnosis, and Reasoning-Action Consistency (RAC), which verifies that belief updates are driven by gathered evidence. Using this pipeline, we construct MedAction-32K, a dataset of 32,681 trajectories from 2,896 PMC cases. Fine-tuning an 8B model on MedAction-32K achieves state-of-the-art performance among open-source models on both MedR-Bench and our curated MedAction-300-Hard benchmark, pushing the edge for open-source medical LLMs.

Personalized healthcare decisions require reasoning about how physiological and behavioral variables influence an individual patient over time. Existing temporal causal discovery methods are poorly matched to this setting: cohort-level models provide stable but non-personalized structures, while per-patient discovery is unreliable because individual trajectories are short, noisy, irregular, and non-stationary. This creates a fundamental gap between population-level causal modeling and the patient-specific, time-varying mechanisms needed for intervention reasoning. We introduce PerCaM-Health, a framework for learning personalized dynamic causal graphs from longitudinal health data. The framework learns a knowledge-guided population temporal graph, then conservatively adapts and evolves it using patient-specific temporal evidence and rolling-window updates, producing interpretable and auditable graph sequences. By coupling these graphs with temporal structural equations, the framework enables patient-level counterfactual queries, such as estimating short-horizon outcome changes under hypothetical behavioral interventions. Experiments on a semi-synthetic dynamic health benchmark show that PerCaM-Health improves graph recovery, dynamic edge tracking, and intervention direction accuracy compared to cohort-level, per-patient, and non-personalized temporal baselines. These results demonstrate that jointly modeling personalization and temporal evolution yields more reliable causal structure and intervention reasoning.

Real-world clinical diagnosis is a complex process in which the doctor is required to obtain information from both interaction with the patient and conducting medical exams. Additionally, the doctor needs to adapt to different patient personas, as well as noisy and incomplete information that can happen at any time during the process. However, existing benchmarks for medical LLMs and methods for automatic diagnosis largely simplify this process by reducing it to single-turn question answering, noise-free conversations, or sequential exam making, etc., ignoring the interactive and uncertain nature of clinical diagnosis. In this paper, we aim to address this gap by formalizing clinical diagnosis as a Partially Observable Markov Decision Process (POMDP) with three action types: questioning the patient, ordering medical exams as tool calls, and issuing a diagnosis. We also introduce a systematic noise model comprising seven patient noise types and three exam noise types. Using our proposed environment, we train an effective diagnosis agent, \textbf{MedExAgent}, through a two-stage pipeline that first performs supervised finetuning on synthetic conversations structured after the Calgary-Cambridge model for clinical interviews, and then applies DAPO to optimize a composite reward capturing diagnostic accuracy, tool call quality, and exam cost including financial cost and patient discomfort. Through extensive experiments and ablation studies, we demonstrate that MedExAgent achieves diagnostic performance comparable to larger models while maintaining cost-efficient examination strategies.

Medical multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have advanced image understanding and short-video analysis, but real clinical review often requires full-procedure video understanding. Unlike general long videos, medical procedures contain highly redundant anatomical views, while decisive evidence is temporally sparse, spatially subtle, and context dependent. Existing benchmarks often assume this evidence has already been localized through images, short clips, or pre-segmented videos, leaving the retrieval-before-reasoning problem under-tested. We introduce MedHorizon, an in-the-wild benchmark for long-context medical video understanding. MedHorizon preserves 759 hours of full-length clinical procedures and provides 1,253 evidence-grounded multiple-choice questionsthat jointly evaluate sparse evidence understanding and multi-hop clinical reasoning. Its evidence is extremely sparse, with only 0.166% evidence frames on average, requiring models to search noisy procedural streams before interpreting and aggregating findings. We evaluate representative general-domain, medical-domain, and long-video MLLMs. The best model reaches only 41.1% accuracy, showing that current systems remain far from robust full-procedure understanding. Further analysis yields four key findings: performance does not scale reliably with more frames, evidence retrieval and clinical interpretation remain primary bottlenecks; these bottlenecks are rooted in weak procedural reasoning and attention drift under redundancy, and generic sampling methods only partially balances local detail with global coverage. MedHorizon provides a rigorous testbed for MLLMs that retrieve sparse evidence and reason over complete clinical workflows.

The training data of large language models (LLMs) comprises a wide range of biomedical literature, reflecting data from many different patient populations. We investigate how it might be possible to recover information on correlation and causal links between patient characteristics, as a key building block for medical decision making. To avoid the pitfalls of direct elicitation, we propose an approach based on structured comparison questions, specifically patient comparison triplet questions. This is combined with a statistical model for the LLM representation that provides estimates of correlations without access to activations or model internals. Intuitively, we consider how similarity decisions of LLMs based on a first variable are affected by providing information on a second variable for one of the patients being assessed. We then induce prompt-level environment shifts to obtain correlation estimates for different subpopulations, which enables an invariant causal prediction (ICP) approach to obtain conservative candidate parent links. We demonstrate the method in two clinical domains, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and multiple sclerosis (MS). Across prompted environments, the elicited correlations are smooth, stable, and clinically interpretable, yet vary in a statistically significant way that supports downstream invariance testing, such that ICP provides a small set of candidate invariant parent links. These results show that indirect elicitation via triplet comparisons can recover meaningful association structure from LLMs and offer a cautious route from implicit correlations to causal statements that are congruent with LLM answering patterns.

The work in this paper evaluates zero-shot and few-shot large language models (LLMs) for safety-critical clinical action extraction using the CLIP discharge-note dataset, with particular emphasis on transitions of care and post-discharge patient safety. To manage the complexity of clinical documentation, we introduce a two-stage extraction framework that decomposes discharge notes, that are written in narrative form, into fine-grained, explicitly actionable clinical tasks through a staged prompting strategy. Our contributions include a systematic assessment of generative LLMs for clinical action extraction, a detailed comparison between general-purpose LLMs and task-specific supervised BERT-based models, and an analysis of annotation inconsistencies across different action categories. We show that contemporary LLMs achieve performance comparable to or exceeding supervised models on binary actionability detection, while supervised baselines retain a meaningful advantage on fine-grained multi-label category classification, despite the absence of task-specific fine-tuning and under strict data-privacy constraints. Qualitative error analysis reveals that many failures stem from misalignment between model reasoning and dataset annotation conventions, particularly in cases involving implicit clinical actions and rigid structural labeling rules. These results indicate that reported performance reflects model limitations due to lack of clinical reasoning, that is not captured by plain annotations. Labels without rationales make it impossible to distinguish clinical reasoning failures from annotation convention mismatches. Advancing clinical NLP requires reasoning-annotated datasets that document why specific spans are actionable, not merely which spans were labeled, enabling proper evaluation of model clinical understanding.

In routine care, individuals identified a priori as high-risk are usually tested for conditions more frequently. Protected attributes, such as sex or ethnicity may also determine testing frequency. Such heterogeneous detection rates across a population induce label error. This causes systematic model error for specific groups and biases performance metrics during validation. This paper proposes a method to correct for such bias in prediction models due to differential diagnostic delay. We use a causal inference framework to define our target estimand: an individual's diagnosis probability in a counterfactual scenario where their diagnosis rate matches that of a reference group. We model the longitudinal process as a hidden Markov model, in which confirmatory test results are emissions from a latent progressive disease stage. We validate our approach in simulated data and apply it to a case study of chronic kidney disease prediction using electronic health records. In simulations, our method reduces prediction bias and improves calibration-in-the-large, correcting the Observed:Expected ratio in the underdiagnosed group from 1.34 (standard deviation: 0.09) in a model developed without any correction for underdiagnosis bias to 1.02 (0.09). Violations of assumptions in the simulation affected the estimation of model parameters, but the proposed approach nonetheless remained better calibrated than the standard model. In the clinical case study, we identify diabetes as the main driver of observability, with an odds ratio of 10.36 (95% confidence interval, 9.80 - 11.02) in 6-month urine albumin-creatinine ratio testing rate. Using our approach to predict the counterfactual diagnostic rate in patients without diabetes, we improved the Observed:Expected ratio of a developed clinical prediction model from 1.55 (1.51 - 1.59) to 1.01 (0.98 - 1.04).

Clinical dietary assessment can generate detailed but high-dimensional nutrient and food-group information that is difficult to translate quickly into counselling priorities. This paper proposes an explainable unsupervised-to-supervised machine learning framework for discovering, reproducing and interpreting dietary patterns using public UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey data. Adult participants aged 19 years and above from NDNS Years 12-15 were represented using 25 energy-adjusted nutrient and food-group features. K-means, Gaussian Mixture Models and Agglomerative Clustering were compared across k = 2-8, with stability and dietetic interpretability used alongside internal validation metrics. The selected K-means k = 4 solution identified four interpretable dietary patterns: high fat/meat and sodium, higher fibre fruit-vegetable micronutrient, high free-sugar snacks and sugary drinks, and dairy/cereal calcium-rich saturated-fat. A supervised surrogate classifier reproduced held-out cluster membership with high test performance (macro-F1 = 0.963), but was interpreted only as an explanatory surrogate rather than as an independent clinical prediction model. SHAP analysis linked predictions to dietetically meaningful drivers, suggesting potential value for dietitian-in-the-loop assessment, counselling prioritisation and follow-up monitoring.

Estimating individualized treatment effects from longitudinal observational data is central to data-driven medicine, yet existing methods face a fundamental limitation: reducing confounding bias often suppresses clinically informative heterogeneity, degrading patient-specific predictions. Here, we identify this tension as a bias-precision paradox in causal representation learning and introduce sampling-based maximum mean discrepancy (sMMD), a stochastic alignment strategy that replaces global adversarial balancing with subset-level matching. We instantiate this approach in a framework for counterfactual outcome prediction with attribution-grounded interpretability. Across two large-scale ICU cohorts (n = 27,783), our framework improves accuracy under distribution shift, reducing error by up to 11.5% and substantially increasing recall in high-risk tasks. Mechanistic analyses show that sMMD selectively preserves clinically decisive variables. In human-AI evaluation, our method outperforms clinicians-in-training and large language models, and improves clinician accuracy by 14.7% while reducing decision time, enabling interpretable, real-time clinical decision support.

Target trial emulation (TTE) enables causal questions to be studied with observational data when randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are infeasible. Yet treatment-effect methods often address causal estimation, missingness, and temporal structure separately, limiting their robustness in electronic health records (EHRs), where time-varying confounding and missing-not-at-random (MNAR) biomarkers can reach 50%--80%. We propose a two-stage pipeline for treatment effect estimation from incomplete longitudinal EHRs. First, CausalFlow-T, a directed acyclic graph (DAG)-constrained normalizing flow with long short-term memory (LSTM)-encoded patient history, performs exact invertible counterfactual inference, avoiding approximation errors from variational inference and separating confounding through explicit causal structure. Ablations on four synthetic and one semi-synthetic benchmark with known counterfactuals show that DAG constraints and exact inference address distinct failure modes: neither compensates for the other. Second, because CausalFlow-T requires completed inputs, we introduce an LLM-driven evolutionary imputer that proposes executable imputation operators rather than individual entries, and evaluate it with three large language model (LLM) backends, including two open-source models. Across 30%--80% MNAR missingness, this imputer achieves the best pooled rank over biomarker and causal metrics, leading in point-wise accuracy and temporal extrapolation while preserving average treatment effect (ATE) recovery as statistical baselines degrade. On Swiss primary-care EHRs from adults with type 2 diabetes initiating a GLP-1 receptor agonist or SGLT-2 inhibitor, the pipeline estimates a per-protocol weight-loss difference of -0.98 kg [95% CI -1.01, -0.96] favoring GLP-1 receptor agonists, consistent with randomized evidence and obtained from realistically incomplete real-world EHRs.

We develop and evaluate a data-driven approach for detecting unusual (anomalous) patient-management actions using past patient cases stored in an electronic health record (EHR) system. Our hypothesis is that patient-management actions that are unusual with respect to past patients may be due to a potential error and that it is worthwhile to raise an alert if such a condition is encountered. We evaluate this hypothesis using data obtained from the electronic health records of 4,486 post-cardiac surgical patients. We base the evaluation on the opinions of a panel of experts. The results support that anomaly-based alerting can have reasonably low false alert rates and that stronger anomalies are correlated with higher alert rates.

Automated mental health prediction using textual data has shown promising results with deep learning and large language models. However, deploying these models in high-stakes real-world settings remains challenging, as existing approaches largely rely on semantic representations and often produce overconfident predictions under ambiguous, noisy, or shifted data. Moreover, most methods lack reliable uncertainty estimation, undermining trust in risk-sensitive mental health applications. To address these limitations, we formulate the task as a multi-view learning problem that integrates semantic information from encoder-only models with higher-level reasoning information from decoder-only models, where reasoning-aware representations and uncertainty modeling are obtained in a trustworthy manner. To ensure reliable fusion, we adopt an evidential learning framework based on Subjective Logic to explicitly model uncertainty and introduce an evidential fusion strategy that balances complementary views while discounting unreliable evidence. Benchmarking on three real-world datasets, Dreaddit, SDCNL, and DepSeverity, reports accuracies of 0.835, 0.731, and 0.751, respectively, demonstrating its potential for reliable mental health prediction. Additional experiments on robustness to noise and case studies for interpretability confirm that our proposed framework not only improves predictive performance but also provides trustworthy uncertainty estimates and human-understandable reasoning signals, making it suitable for risk-sensitive applications in mental health assessment.

The objective of this paper is to understand what characteristics and features of clinical data influence physician's decision about ordering laboratory tests or prescribing medications the most. We conduct our analysis on data and decisions extracted from electronic health records of 4486 post-surgical cardiac patients. The summary statistics for 335 different lab order decisions and 407 medication decisions are reported. We show that in many cases, physician's lab-order and medication decisions can be well predicted from a small subset of all features.

Anomaly detection methods can be very useful in identifying interesting or concerning events. In this work, we develop and examine new probabilistic anomaly detection methods that let us evaluate management decisions for a specific patient and identify those decisions that are highly unusual with respect to patients with the same or similar condition. The statistics used in this detection are derived from probabilistic models such as Bayesian networks that are learned from a database of past patient cases. We apply our methods to the problem of identifying unusual patient-management decisions in post-surgical cardiac patients.

We present FairHealth, an open-source Python library that provides a unified, modular framework for trustworthy machine learning in healthcare applications, with particular focus on low-resource and low-income country (LMIC) settings such as Bangladesh. FairHealth addresses four critical gaps in existing healthcare AI toolkits: (1) the absence of integrated fairness auditing for biosignals and clinical tabular data; (2) the lack of privacy-preserving federated learning tools compatible with standard ML workflows; (3) missing explainability tools tailored for low-bandwidth clinical decision support; and (4) no existing toolkit covering Global South healthcare datasets. Built from five peer-reviewed research contributions, FairHealth provides six modules covering federated learning with homomorphic encryption (fairhealth.federated), intersectional fairness metrics (fairhealth.fairness), hybrid fuzzy-SHAP explainability (fairhealth.explain), multilingual dengue triage (fairhealth.lowresource), equitable disaster aid allocation (fairhealth.equity), and public dataset loaders (fairhealth.datasets). All datasets used are publicly available without institutional data use agreements. FairHealth is installable via pip install fairhealth(PyPI: pypi.org/project/fairhealth/) and available at https://github.com/Farjana-Yesmin/fairhealth.

Clinical named entity recognition from dental progress notes is challenging because documentation is highly unstructured, domain-specific, and often privacy-sensitive. We developed a locally deployable framework that enables small language models to self-generate, verify, refine, and evaluate entity-specific prompts for extracting multiple clinical entities from dental notes. Using 1,200 annotated notes, we evaluated candidate open-weight models with multi-prompt ensemble inference and further adapted selected models using QLoRA-based supervised fine-tuning and direct preference optimization. Model performance varied substantially, highlighting the need for task-specific evaluation rather than reliance on generic benchmarks. Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct achieved the strongest baseline performance. After DPO, Qwen2.5-14B-Instruct and Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct achieved micro/macro F1 scores of 0.864/0.837 and 0.806/0.797, respectively. These findings suggest that automated prompt optimization combined with lightweight preference-based post-training can support scalable clinical information extraction using locally deployed small language models.

Emergency department triage assigns patients an acuity score that determines treatment priority, and clinical evidence documents persistent gender disparities in human acuity assessment. As hospitals pilot large language models (LLMs) as triage decision support, a critical question is whether these models reproduce or mitigate known biases. We present EQUITRIAGE, a fairness audit of LLM-based ESI assignment evaluating five models (Gemini-3-Flash, Nemotron-3-Super, DeepSeek-V3.1, Mistral-Small-3.2, GPT-4.1-Nano) across 374,275 evaluations on 18,714 MIMIC-IV-ED vignettes under four prompt strategies. Of 9,368 originals, 9,346 are paired with a gender-swapped counterfactual. All five models produced flip rates above a pre-registered 5% threshold (9.9% to 43.8%). Two showed directional female undertriage (DeepSeek F/M 2.15:1, Gemini 1.34:1); two were near-parity; one had high sensitivity with weak male-direction asymmetry. DeepSeek's directional bias coexisted with a low outcome-linked calibration gap (0.013 against MIMIC-IV admission), a Chouldechova-style dissociation between within-group calibration and between-pair counterfactual invariance. Demographic blinding reduced Gemini's flip rate to 0.5%; an age-preserving blind variant left DeepSeek with residual F/M 1.25, implicating age as a residual channel. Chain-of-thought prompting degraded accuracy for all five models. A two-model ablation reveals opposite underlying mechanisms for the same directional phenotype: in Gemini the signal is emergent in the combined name+gender swap, while in DeepSeek the gender token alone carries it. EQUITRIAGE shows that group parity, counterfactual invariance, and gender calibration are distinct fairness properties, that intervention effectiveness is model-dependent, and that per-model counterfactual auditing should precede clinical deployment.

Question: Does atomic fact-checking, which decomposes AI treatment recommendations into individually verifiable claims linked to source guideline documents, increase clinician trust compared to traditional explainability approaches? Findings: In this randomized trial of 356 clinicians generating 7,476 trust ratings, atomic fact-checking produced a large effect on trust (Cohen's d = 0.94), increasing the proportion of clinicians expressing trust from 26.9% to 66.5%. Traditional transparency mechanisms showed a dose-response gradient of improvement over baseline (d = 0.25 to 0.50). Meaning: Decomposing AI recommendations into individually verifiable claims linked to source guidelines produces substantially higher clinician trust than traditional explainability approaches in high-stakes clinical decisions.

This paper presents a reproducible and process-aware pipeline for predictive monitoring of clinical pathways. The approach integrates data lifting, temporal reconstruction, event log construction, prefix-based representations, and predictive modeling to support continuous reasoning on partially observed patient trajectories, overcoming the limitations of traditional retrospective process mining. The framework is evaluated on COVID-19 clinical pathways using ICU admission as the prediction target, considering 4,479 patient cases and 46,804 prefixes. Predictive models are trained and evaluated using a case-level split, with 896 patients in the test set. Logistic Regression achieves the best performance (AUC 0.906, F1-score 0.835). A detailed prefix-based analysis shows that predictive performance improves progressively as new clinical events become available, with AUC increasing from 0.642 at early stages to 0.942 at later stages of the pathway. The results highlight two key findings: predictive signals emerge progressively along clinical pathways, and process-aware representations enable effective early risk estimation from evolving patient trajectories. Overall, the findings suggest that predictive monitoring in healthcare is best conceived as a continuous, dynamically aware process, in which risk estimates are progressively refined as the patient journey evolves.

We introduce TRACE, a cross-domain engineering framework for trustworthy agentic AI in operationally critical domains. TRACE combines a four-layer reference architecture with an explicit classical-ML vs. LLM-validator split (L2a/L2b), a stateful orchestration-and-escalation policy (L3), and bounded human supervision (L4); a metrologically grounded trust-metric suite mapped to GUM/VIM/ISO 17025; and a Model-Parsimony principle quantified by the Computational Parsimony Ratio (CPR). Three instantiations--clinical decision support, industrial multi-domain operations, and a judicial AI assistant--transfer the samearchitecture and metrics across principally different governance contexts. The L2a/L2b separation makes the use of large language models a deliberate design decision rather than an architectural default, with parsimony quantified through CPR. TRACE introduces CPR as a first-class design principle in trustworthy-AI engineering.

In recent years, machine learning has made significant progress in clinical outcome prediction, demonstrating increasingly accurate results. However, the substantial resources required for hospitals to train these models, such as data collection, labeling, and computational power, limit the feasibility for smaller hospitals to develop their own models. An alternative approach involves transferring a machine learning model trained by a large hospital to smaller hospitals, allowing them to fine-tune the model on their specific patient data. However, these models are often trained and validated on data from a single hospital, raising concerns about their generalizability to new data. Our research shows that there are notable differences in measurement distributions and frequencies across various regions in the United States. To address this, we propose a benchmark that tests a machine learning model's ability to transfer from a source domain to different regions across the country. This benchmark assesses a model's capacity to learn meaningful information about each new domain while retaining key features from the original domain. Using this benchmark, we frame the transfer of a machine learning model from one region to another as a domain incremental learning problem. While the task of patient outcome prediction remains the same, the input data distribution varies, necessitating a model that can effectively manage these shifts. We evaluate two popular domain incremental learning methods: data replay, which stores examples from previous data sources for fine-tuning on the current source, and Elastic Weight Consolidation (EWC), a model parameter regularization method that maintains features important for both data sources.

This paper presents the joint participation of the BIT.UA and AAUBS groups in the ArchEHR-QA 2026 shared task, which focuses on clinical question answering and evidence grounding in a low-resource setting. Due to the absence of training data and the strict data privacy constraints inherent to the healthcare domain (e.g. GDPR), we investigate the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) without weight updates. We evaluate several state-of-the-art proprietary models and locally deployable open-source alternatives using various prompt engineering strategies, including task decomposition, Chain-of-Thought, and in-context learning. Furthermore, we explore majority voting and LLM-as-a-judge ensembling techniques to maximize predictive robustness. Our results demonstrate that while proprietary models exhibit strong resilience to prompt variations, domain-adapted open-source models (such as MedGemma 3 27B) achieve highly competitive performance when paired with the right prompt. Overall, our prompt-based approach proved highly effective, securing 1st place in Subtask 4 (evidence citation alignment) and 3rd place in Subtask 3 (patient-friendly answer generation). All code, results, and prompts are available on our GitHub repository: https://github.com/bioinformatics-ua/ArchEHR-QA-2026.

Real-world clinical data is inherently multimodal, providing complementary evidence that mirrors the practical necessity of jointly assessing multiple related outcomes. Although multi-task learning can improve efficiency by sharing information across outcomes, existing approaches often fail to balance shared representation learning with outcome-specific modeling. Hard parameter sharing can trigger negative transfer when task gradients conflict, while flexible sharing may still entangle shared and task-specific signals. To address this, we propose a multi-task framework built on a unified Transformer for multimodal fusion, augmented with Orthogonal Task Decomposition (OrthTD) to split patient representations into shared and task-specific subspaces and impose a geometric orthogonality constraint to reduce redundancy and isolate task-specific signals. We evaluated OrthTD on a real-world cohort of 12,430 surgical patients for predicting four outcomes. OrthTD achieved average AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of 87.5% and average AUPRC (area under the precision-recall curve) of 37.2%, consistently outperformed advanced tabular and multi-task methods. Notably, OrthTD achieves substantial gains in AUPRC, indicating superior performance in identifying rare events within imbalanced clinical data. These results suggest that enforcing non-redundant shared and task-specific representations can improve multi-outcome prediction from multimodal clinical data.

With the increase of the Electronic Health Records (EHR) data, more and more researchers are developing machine learning models to learn from the medical notes. These unstructured text data pose significant challenges on the learning process as the quality of data is low. These data are often messy, repetitive and redundant. We have shown these notes data to be informative by conducting the after-discharge mortality rate prediction task. The AUC-ROC for models using the medical note information is generally 0.1 higher than those without the medical notes. Furthermore, we propose the Deep Neural Network(DNN) model with 'pooling' mechanism to enhance the mortality prediction. Based on the experimental results, we demonstrate that the proposed model outperforms the traditional machine learning models like the tree-based models. The proposed method learns from the most informative medical notes and improves the prediction accuracy significantly. The AUC-ROC for the proposed model is 2% to 14% higher than the traditional ones in 15-days, 30-days, 60-days, 365-days after-discharge mortality prediction tasks. Moreover, we can discover some interesting knowledge through the traditional and proposed models. These knowledge are inspiring but also consistent with the previous findings. The models are able to reveal the relationships between the informative keywords and documents from the medical notes and the severity of the patients.

Discharge summaries require extracting critical information from lengthy electronic health records (EHRs), a process that is labor-intensive when performed manually. Large language models (LLMs) can improve generation efficiency; however, they are prone to producing faithfulness hallucinations, statements that contradict source records, posing direct risks to patient safety. To address this, we present CuraView, a multi-agent framework for sentence-level detection and evidence-grounded explanation of faithfulness hallucinations in discharge summaries. CuraView constructs a GraphRAG-based knowledge graph from patient-level EHRs and implements a closed-loop generation-detection pipeline with sentence-level evidence retrieval and classification spanning four evidence grades from strong support to direct contradiction (E1-E4), yielding structured and interpretable evidence chains. We evaluate CuraView on a subset of 250 patients from the Discharge-Me benchmark, with 50 patients held out for testing. Our fine-tuned Qwen3-14B detection model achieves an F1 of 0.831 on the safety-critical E4 metric (90.9% recall, 76.5% precision) and an F1 of 0.823 on E3+E4, representing a 50.0% relative improvement over the base model and outperforming RAGTruth-style and QAGS-style baselines. These results demonstrate that evidence-chain-based graph retrieval verification substantially improves the factual reliability of clinical documentation, while simultaneously producing reusable annotated datasets for downstream model training and distillation.

Mental-health dialogue models are increasingly evaluated by AI-based evaluators, yet these evaluators often treat surface empathy, supportiveness, or fluency as evidence of safety. In this paper, we study a hidden failure mode that we call implicit sycophancy: a response may appear empathetic while implicitly reinforcing catastrophizing, avoidance, hopeless prediction, or CBT-style labeling. To examine this problem, we introduce a diagnostic benchmark for implicit-sycophancy detection, built from three representative mental-health dialogue sources covering everyday peer support, counseling-style emotional support, and crisis-oriented interaction, and further construct a leakage-audited clean single-response matched benchmark with 500 contexts and 1,500 matched response windows. We then propose Dynamic Emotional Signature Graphs (DESG), a structured offline audit framework that separates LLM-based state extraction from final scoring and evaluates clinical direction through semantic, affective, and cognitive-distortion state transitions rather than free-form LLM judgment. Unlike metadata, surface-style, lexical, embedding, and rubric-LLM baselines, DESG scores the direction of clinical-state change induced by a response; on the leakage-audited clean matched benchmark, DESG-StateRisk improves over the strongest non-DESG baseline by 0.0488 macro-F1 and achieves the best harmful-risk detection result. These results suggest that evaluating implicit sycophancy requires explicit clinical-state modeling together with leakage checks, shortcut controls, and competitive baselines.

De-identification of clinical text is a prerequisite for the secondary use of electronic health records. Existing public benchmarks such as the i2b2 2006 and 2014 corpora are over a decade old and lack the semantic and demographic diversity of modern clinical narratives. Large Language Models (LLMs) reach state-of-the-art zero-shot extraction, but their use at enterprise scale is limited by computational cost and by hospital data governance that restricts sending Protected Health Information (PHI) to cloud APIs. We introduce SHIELD (Synthetic Human-annotated Identifier-replaced Entries for Learning and De-identification), a diverse clinical note dataset of 1,381 notes with 10,229 gold-standard PHI spans across 9 categories, built with set-cover diversity sampling across demographic and document-type strata and human-in-the-loop adjudication. We evaluate four LLMs (two proprietary, two open-weight) to establish a performance ceiling on SHIELD, then show that a teacher-student distillation framework transfers these capabilities into locally deployable Small Language Models. Our best distilled model reaches micro-averaged span-level precision of 0.89 and recall of 0.88 while running on standard workstation hardware. It trails its cloud teacher on per-category recall (0.90 vs. 0.81 macro-averaged) but remains competitive given its lower cost and on-premise deployability. Cross-dataset evaluation shows that diversity-trained models generalize well on universal structured PHI categories, while institution-specific entities remain hard to transfer in both directions, which suggests pairing broad-coverage models with specialized models for high-volume, semi-structured note types. We publicly release the SHIELD dataset and the distilled DeBERTa v3 model to provide an accurate, cost-effective de-identification pipeline deployable entirely behind institutional firewalls.

Modeling latent clinical constructs from unconstrained clinical interactions is a unique challenge in affective computing. We present ADAPTS (Agentic Decomposition for Automated Protocol-agnostic Tracking of Symptoms), a framework for automated rating of depression and anxiety severity using a mixture-of-agents LLM architecture. This approach decomposes long-form clinical interviews into symptom-specific reasoning tasks, producing auditable justifications while preserving temporal and speaker alignment. Generalization was evaluated across two independent datasets ($N=204$) with distinct interview structures. On high-discrepancy interviews, automated ratings approximated expert benchmarks ($\text{absolute error}=22$) more closely than original human ratings ($\text{absolute error}=26$). Implementing an ``extended'' protocol that incorporates qualitative clinical conventions significantly stabilized ratings, with absolute agreement reaching $\text{ICC(2,1)} = 0.877$. These findings suggest that the ADAPTS framework enables promising evaluations of psychiatric severity. While the current implementation is purely text-based, the underlying architecture is readily extensible to multimodal inputs, including acoustic and visual features. By approximating expert-level precision in a protocol-agnostic manner, this framework provides a foundation for objective and scalable psychiatric assessment, especially in resource-limited settings.

Automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems remain brittle on dysarthric and other atypical speech. Recent audio-language models raise the possibility of improving performance by conditioning on additional clinical context at inference time, but it is unclear whether these models can make use of such information. We introduce a benchmark built on the Speech Accessibility Project (SAP) dataset that tests whether diagnosis labels, clinician-derived speech ratings, and progressively richer clinical descriptions improve transcription accuracy for dysarthric speech. Across matched comparisons on nine models, we find that current models do not meaningfully use this context: diagnosis-informed and clinically detailed prompts yield negligible improvements and often degrade word error rate. We complement the prompting analysis with context-dependent fine-tuning, showing that LoRA adaptation with a mixture of clinical prompt formats achieves a WER of 0.066, a 52% relative reduction over the frozen baseline, while preserving performance when context is unavailable. Subgroup analyses reveal significant gains for Down syndrome and mild-severity speakers. These results clarify where current models fall short and provide a testbed for measuring progress toward more inclusive ASR.

Evidence derived from large-scale real-world data (RWD) is increasingly informing regulatory evaluation and healthcare decision-making. Administrative claims provide population-scale, longitudinal records of healthcare utilization, expenditure, and detailed coding of diagnoses, procedures, and medications, yet their potential as a substrate for healthcare foundation models remains largely unexplored. Here we present ReClaim, a generative transformer trained from scratch on 43.8 billion medical events from more than 200 million enrollees in the MarketScan claims data spanning 2008-2022. ReClaim models longitudinal trajectories across diagnoses, procedures, medications, and expenditure, and was scaled to 140 million, 700 million, and 1.7 billion parameters. Across over 1,000 disease-onset prediction tasks, ReClaim achieved a mean AUC of 75.6%, substantially outperforming disease-specific LightGBM (66.3%) and the transformer-based Delphi model (69.4%), with the largest gains for rare diseases. These advantages held across retrospective and prospective evaluations and in external validation on two independent datasets. Performance improved monotonically with scale, and post-training added 13.8 percentage points over pre-training alone. Beyond disease prediction, ReClaim captured financial outcomes and improved real-world evidence (RWE) analyses: for healthcare expenditure forecasting it increased explained variance from 0.28 to 0.37 relative to LightGBM, and in a target trial emulation it reduced systematic bias by 72% on average relative to Delphi. Together, these results establish administrative claims as a scalable substrate for healthcare foundation models and show that learned representations generalize across time periods and data sources, supporting disease surveillance, expenditure forecasting, and RWE generation.

Healthcare automation is shaped by local procedures and organizational constraints, so agent capabilities rarely transfer unchanged across settings. Agent skills, self-contained directories that package reusable procedures for AI agents, are emerging as a procedural layer for adapting healthcare agents across diverse healthcare settings. We present the first empirical analysis of healthcare agent skills, drawing on 557 healthcare-related skills filtered from 58,159 public skills on ClawHub and annotated along ten dimensions covering function, deployment context, autonomy, and safety. We find that public healthcare skills emphasize patient-facing workflow automation and monitoring rather than the diagnostic and treatment-oriented tasks foregrounded in healthcare-agent research; coverage of the healthcare lifecycle and specialized clinical inputs remains uneven; and general technical risk does not reliably capture clinical risk. These findings position healthcare skills as a procedural layer not yet addressed by current benchmarks and risk frameworks.

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) remains a leading cause of late-stage clinical trial attrition. However, existing computational predictors primarily rely on binary classification, a framing that limits generalization and yields no mechanistic insight to guide translational decisions. We argue that DILI prediction is better posed as an explainable hypothesis-generation problem. To support this shift, we introduce the DILER Benchmark, a dataset that extends beyond binary labels by augmenting a curated set of molecules with mechanistic hepatotoxicity hypotheses derived from biomedical literature. We further present HADES, an agentic system designed to generate transparent and auditable reasoning traces. By combining molecular-level predictions, metabolite decomposition, structural understanding, and toxicity pathway evidence, HADES mechanistically assesses DILI risk. Evaluated on the DILER Benchmark, HADES outperforms existing models in binary classification, achieving a ROC-AUC of 0.68 on the Test Set and 0.59 on the challenging Post-2021 Set, compared with 0.63 and 0.50 for DILI-Predictor, respectively. More importantly, we establish a baseline for mechanistic hypothesis generation, where HADES achieves a Hypothesis Alignment Fuzzy Jaccard Index of 0.16. This result underscores the inherent complexity of the task while highlighting the need for advanced explainable approaches in predictive toxicology.

Risk scores are an interpretable and actionable class of machine learning models with applications in medicine, insurance, and risk management. Unlike most computational methods, risk scores are designed to be computed by a human by attributing points to a data sample based on a limited set of criteria. The most common approaches for generating risk scores use linear regressions to estimate the effect of selected variables. We propose a simple and effective approach towards building compact and predictive risk scores. We provide an algorithm based on gradient boosting that is capable of modeling nonlinear effects, along with a C++ implementation with Python and R bindings. Through extensive empirical evaluation on twelve tabular datasets spanning regression, classification, and time-to-event tasks, we show that our method achieves competitive predictive performance while producing substantially more compact scores than regression-based alternatives, with 60% fewer rules for classification tasks and 16% fewer rules for time-to-event tasks on average, compared to AutoScore.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for clinical decision support including multilingual diagnosis in low-resource settings. However, their reliability, calibration and safety characteristics remain insufficiently understood for structured, high-risk tasks. We present a system-level analysis of multilingual orthopedic diagnosis from free-text clinical notes in English, Hindi and Punjabi. We evaluate three modeling regimes: (i) task-aligned multilingual transformer encoders, (ii) a task-fine-tuned baseline (DistilBERT), and (iii) a domain-adaptive architecture tailored to orthopedic text (IndicBERT-HPA). These models are compared with zero-shot, instruction-tuned LLMs to assess suitability for structured diagnostic classification. Results indicate that while LLMs exhibit strong linguistic fluency, they show unstable calibration and reduced reliability under structured multilingual conditions, particularly in low-resource languages. These findings are specific to zero-shot evaluation and do not imply limitations of fine-tuned models. Domain-adaptive specialization substantially improves cross-lingual discrimination and confidence behavior. IndicBERT-HPA, with language-specific orthopedic adapter heads achieves consistently strong performance across six diagnostic categories and more predictable deployment characteristics than task-only adaptation. Building on these observations, we outline a conceptual deterministic agent-based validation framework for future implementation, formalizing evidence checks, language-sensitive validation and conservative human-in-the-loop gating. Reliable multilingual clinical decision support requires specialized architecture, explicit reliability analysis, and structured validation for safety-critical systems.

We introduce PhysicianBench, a benchmark for evaluating LLM agents on physician tasks grounded in real clinical setting within electronic health record (EHR) environments. Existing medical agent benchmarks primarily focus on static knowledge recall, single-step atomic actions, or action intent without verifiable execution against the environment. As a result, they fail to capture the long-horizon, composite workflows that characterize real clinical systems. PhysicianBench comprises 100 long-horizon tasks adapted from real consultation cases between primary care and subspecialty physicians, with each task independently reviewed by a separate panel of physicians. Tasks are instantiated in an EHR environment with real patient records and accessed through the same standard APIs used by commercial EHR vendors. Tasks span 21 specialties (e.g., cardiology, endocrinology, oncology, psychiatry) and diverse workflow types (e.g., diagnosis interpretation, medication prescribing, treatment planning), requiring an average of 27 tool calls per task. Solving each task requires retrieving data across encounters, reasoning over heterogeneous clinical information, executing consequential clinical actions, and producing clinical documentation. Each task is decomposed into structured checkpoints (670 in total across the benchmark) capturing distinct stages of completion graded by task-specific scripts with execution-grounded verification. Across 13 proprietary and open-source LLM agents, the best-performing model achieves only 46% success rate (pass@1), while open-source models reach at most 19%, revealing a substantial gap between current agent capabilities and the demands of real-world clinical workflows. PhysicianBench provides a realistic and execution-grounded benchmark for measuring progress toward autonomous clinical agents.

Accurate prediction of physician referral links is essential for optimizing care coordination and reducing fragmentation in healthcare delivery. However, existing computational methods, ranging from triadic closure heuristics to graph neural networks, fail to capture the intrinsic properties of physician referral networks, including sparsity, disassortative degree mixing, and hub-dominated topology. Here, we propose H3, a healthcare three-hop index that addresses these limitations by modeling indirect referral pathways through intermediate physicians, with degree-based normalization and a redundancy penalty to mitigate hub-mediated noise. Using Medicare Physician Shared Patient Patterns data, we evaluate H3 under two complementary prediction regimes: within-period prediction, which assesses recovery of contemporaneous referral links under sparse conditions, and cross-period prediction, which tests robustness to temporal shift as referral windows expand. Across both regimes, H3 consistently outperforms classical heuristics and deep learning-based baselines. Unlike black-box neural network approaches, H3 produces fully decomposable predictions traceable to specific intermediary physicians, offering a transparent and deployable solution for referral network completion.

Personalized models are essential in digital health because individuals exhibit substantial physiological and behavioral heterogeneity. Yet personalization is limited by scarce and noisy user-specific data. Most existing methods rely on population pretraining or data from similar users only, which can lead to biased transfer and weak generalization. We propose a unified personalization framework that trains a personal model using adaptively weighted support users, including both similar and dissimilar individuals. The objective integrates personal loss, similarity-weighted transfer from similar users, and contrastive regularization from dissimilar users to suppress misleading correlations. An iterative optimization algorithm jointly updates model parameters and user similarity weights. Experiments on six tasks across four real-world digital health datasets show consistent improvements over population and personalized baselines. The method achieves up to 10% lower RMSE on large-scale datasets and approximately 25% lower RMSE in low-data settings. The learned adaptive weights improve data efficiency and provide interpretable guidance for targeted data selection.

Deep learning models for drug--target interaction (DTI) prediction often achieve strong benchmark performance without necessarily relying on mechanistically meaningful molecular features, a limitation that standard accuracy-based evaluation cannot detect. We introduce ISAAC (Intervention-based Structural Auditing Approach for Causal Reasoning), a post-hoc framework that evaluates prior-relative structural sensitivity by probing frozen models through matched mechanistic and spurious input-level interventions, independently of predictive accuracy. Applied to three sequence-based DTI architectures on the Davis benchmark, ISAAC reveals approximately 25% relative differences in reasoning scores across models with comparable AUROC (within around 3%), stable across training and intervention seeds and two distinct perturbation operators. These discrepancies, undetectable under conventional accuracy metrics, motivate the use of post-hoc structural auditing as a complement to standard performance evaluation in scientific machine learning for molecular modeling.

Fall detection is a critical task in healthcare, particularly for elderly people. Timely fall detection and treatment can prevent severe injuries. Sensor-based activity data can be used to detect fall. However, this data are highly sensitive and raises significant privacy concerns. Existing privacy approaches apply uniform noise across all training samples, which affects the prediction performance. To address this limitation, we propose a Class-Aware Adaptive Differential Privacy (CA-ADP) framework integrated with a hybrid 3D Convolutional Neural Network and Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (3D CNN-BiLSTM) architecture. The CA-ADP mechanism dynamically adjusts the magnitude of noise added to gradients based on the class composition of each mini-batch. This process ensures privacy while mitigates performance degradation. We formally analyze the $(ε,δ)$-Differential Privacy guarantee and provide a privacy-utility trade-off analysis. The proposed method is evaluated on three public benchmark datasets, namely SisFall, UP-Fall, and MobiAct. The experimental results show that the proposed privacy model achieves improvements of 3.3%, 8.5%, and 7.5% over the conventional privacy-based model in terms of F-score for the SisFall, UP-Fall, and MobiAct datasets, respectively. Comparisons with prior studies show that the CA-AD based framework achieves competitive performance and provides formal privacy guarantees, which are largely overlooked in existing studies. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests confirm that the proposed mechanism consistently outperforms conventional differential privacy. Those results establish the proposed CA-ADP framework as an effective approach to privacy-preserving fall detection in real-world healthcare settings.

Electrocardiogram (ECG) biometrics have emerged as a promising modality for continuous, liveness-aware authentication in wearable systems. However, many prior studies report overly optimistic results due to data leakage (e.g., random splits within the same session). To address this issue, we introduce ECG-biometrics-bench, a modular, reproducible benchmarking framework that standardizes preprocessing, segmentation, and evaluation across seven widely used public ECG datasets spanning clinical, ambulatory, and large-scale cohort settings. The framework supports both closed-set and open-set (i.e., subject-disjoint generalization in this work) evaluation, as well as progressively realistic protocols including cross-session and long-term temporal separation. To facilitate reproducible research in the community, the ECG-biometrics-bench repository will be made publicly accessible on GitHub upon the acceptance of this manuscript. Through a comprehensive multi-dataset analysis, we expose the Random Split Fallacy, demonstrating that intra-session evaluation protocols artificially inflate performance while masking severe degradation caused by temporal drift and unseen identities. Furthermore, by evaluating multiple architectures, including DeepECG, ResNet1D, and CNN-LSTM, we show that these failures are not model-specific but are likely inherent to current supervised feature-learning paradigms. Finally, we demonstrate that performance degradation due to temporal aging can be partially mitigated through a heavy enrollment, lightweight authentication strategy based on dynamic multi-session template fusion. These findings establish a more realistic baseline for ECG biometrics and highlight critical challenges that must be addressed for reliable real-world deployment.

Isolated word meanings are inherently uncertain. This uncertainty reduces when they are combined and anchored in context. We propose that grammar compresses meaning uncertainty cross-linguistically, which is reflected in brain and selectively disrupted in disorders. Compression was operationalized as the relative difference between non-contextual surprisal estimated from lexical frequency, and contextual surprisal from grammar-sensitive models. In narratives from 20 languages, contextual surprisal reduced frequency-based surprisal. This reduction closely tracked the surprisal cost of reversing word order, and scaled with richer, non-redundant lexis as organized by more complex but optimal dependency structure. During fMRI, surprisal and its reduction explained BOLD activity for comprehension and production in overlapping but distinct regions. Uncertainty reduction was significantly attenuated in aphasia, dementia, and schizophrenia, but remained intact where primary deficit is not language. These findings position uncertainty reduction via grammar as a foundational concept that illuminates principles, brain basis, and disruptions of language.

Predicting future clinical outcomes from electronic health records (EHR) remains challenging due to the complexity and heterogeneity of patient data. LLMs have shown strong potential for such predictive tasks, yet existing approaches mainly focus on enhancing medical knowledge through distillation or RAG while relying on the model's internal ability to interpret contextual information. In this work, we present ReMedi (Reasoner for Medical Clinical Prediction), a framework for improving clinical outcome prediction from EHR. ReMedi generates rationale-answer pairs using a challenging sample regeneration mechanism for complex clinical questions, which leverages ground-truth answers as hints to enhance reasoning for further fine-tuning and preference tuning. ReMedi integrates ground-truth outcome guidance into the preference data construction loop, regenerating rationale-answer variants. By tuning on these rationale-answer pairs, the model improves its predictive performance. Experiments on multiple EHR prediction tasks demonstrate substantial gains of up to 19.9 percent over state-of-the-art baselines in terms of F1 score, underscoring ReMedi's effectiveness in real-world clinical prediction.

AI language technologies (AILTs), increasingly enabled by large language models (LLMs), are becoming embedded in multilingual healthcare workflows for translation, rewriting, documentation, interpreting, and messaging in language-discordant settings. Yet fluent output is not the same as clinically safe or equitable communication: performance varies across languages, accents, tasks, and workflows, and efficiency gains can hide errors, reduce traceability, and shift responsibility across clinicians, translators, interpreters, and health systems. This narrative review synthesises recent peer-reviewed evidence across written communication, spoken communication, and emerging agentic workflows. Using the Human-Centered AI Language Technology (HCAILT) lens, it examines capabilities, evaluation practices, implementation patterns, and recurrent errors through reliability, safety culture, and trustworthiness. We identify key convergences and contradictions in the literature and propose seven grand challenges for the next phase of research and deployment. Progress, we argue, requires not only better models but also accountable sociotechnical design, calibrated human oversight, and stronger collaboration across MT/NLP, translation studies, HCI, clinical practice, implementation science, and policy.

Predicting complex human traits from genetic data is challenging because different genetic, clinical, and molecular data sources often contain different parts of the signal. Here, we present EFGPP, a reproducible framework for generating, ranking, and combining multiple types of data for genotype-to-phenotype prediction. We applied EFGPP to migraine prediction using UK Biobank data from 733 individuals. The framework combined genotype-derived features, principal components, clinical and metabolomic covariates, and polygenic risk scores generated from migraine and depression GWAS using PLINK, PRSice-2, AnnoPred, and LDAK-GWAS. The best single data type achieved a test AUC of 0.644, while combining multiple data types improved performance to 0.688 using migraine-focused inputs and 0.663 using cross-trait depression-derived inputs. Genetic features alone did not outperform the covariates-only baseline, but genotype-derived features performed better than PRS alone, and depression-derived PRS showed useful predictive signal. Overall, EFGPP provides a practical proof-of-concept framework for prioritising and integrating heterogeneous genetic data sources for complex phenotype prediction.

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