analiza aiqbench
This research establishes a critical framework for evaluating AI-driven psychiatric intake tools by using clinician-grounded benchmarks rather than generic metrics. The study reveals that while LLMs can retrieve clinical data effectively, they struggle with inferring unspoken context and identifying safety risks compared to human experts. These findings are essential for health systems deploying generative AI in sensitive mental health applications, highlighting the immediate need for robust quality assurance protocols before patient deployment.
Clinician-Grounded Quality Assurance for AI-Assisted Psychiatric Intake
arXiv:2609.21149v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Before patients can use AI-assisted psychiatric intake systems, health systems need practical ways to routinely evaluate these tools against their clinical standards for quality assurance. Because clinicians may use different intake styles, evaluation for this task must (1) support comparison across interviewing approaches, (2) minimize clinician burden, and (3) measure clinically relevant performance for health systems deploying these technologies. We present a clinician-grounded evaluation platform built around a memory-augmented patient simulator for open-ended AI interviewing, InterviewPlayground. We created interactive patients using InterviewPlayground with our expert-authored vignettes, constructed a simulated intake platform for the interviews, and designed evaluation modalities relevant to intake. In a pilot of 6 clinicians in a 25-minute assessment compared to a GPT-based LLM intake interviewer, the LLM recovered more of the clinically relevant items embedded in the patient vignettes (88.0% vs. 38.9%), but made more clinical inferences not based on the interview (56.8% vs. 27.8%), and characterized identified safety concerns less often (33.3% vs. 66.7%), setting the stage for deployed quality assurance for this task.
Abstract:Before patients can use AI-assisted psychiatric intake systems, health systems need practical ways to routinely evaluate these tools against their clinical standards for quality assurance. Because clinicians may use different intake styles, evaluation for this task must (1) support comparison across interviewing approaches, (2) minimize clinician burden, and (3) measure clinically relevant performance for health systems deploying these technologies. We present a clinician-grounded evaluation platform built around a memory-augmented patient simulator for open-ended AI interviewing, InterviewPlayground. We created interactive patients using InterviewPlayground with our expert-authored vignettes, constructed a simulated intake platform for the interviews, and designed evaluation modalities relevant to intake. In a pilot of 6 clinicians in a 25-minute assessment compared to a GPT-based LLM intake interviewer, the LLM recovered more of the clinically relevant items embedded in the patient vignettes (88.0% vs. 38.9%), but made more clinical inferences not based on the interview (56.8% vs. 27.8%), and characterized identified safety concerns less often (33.3% vs. 66.7%), setting the stage for deployed quality assurance for this task.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2609.21149 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.21149v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.21149 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 266 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

AI in healthcare: applications and best practices
Databricks · 24 iul. 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · 2 oct. 2026

Vertical Advantage: Transforming Industries with Lakebase and Agentic AI
Databricks · 27 aug. 2026

Hint-based CoT faithfulness evals still mostly work on Claude
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026