EHR-derived standardized patients and dual-track evaluation reveal LLMs trail clinicians by 37.28 points on full psychiatric encounters, with mental-status assessment the main bottleneck.
LingxiDiagBench: A multi-agent framework for benchmarking LLMs in Chinese psychiatric consultation and diagnosis.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.09379
3 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Mental disorders are highly prevalent worldwide, but the shortage of psychiatrists and the inherent subjectivity of interview-based diagnosis create substantial barriers to timely and consistent mental-health assessment. Progress in AI-assisted psychiatric diagnosis is constrained by the absence of benchmarks that simultaneously provide realistic patient simulation, clinician-verified diagnostic labels, and support for dynamic multi-turn consultation. We present LingxiDiagBench, a large-scale multi-agent benchmark that evaluates LLMs on both static diagnostic inference and dynamic multi-turn psychiatric consultation in Chinese. At its core is LingxiDiag-16K, a dataset of 16,000 EMR-aligned synthetic consultation dialogues designed to reproduce real clinical demographic and diagnostic distributions across 12 ICD-10 psychiatric categories. Through extensive experiments across state-of-the-art LLMs, we establish key findings: (1) although LLMs achieve high accuracy on binary depression--anxiety classification (up to 92.3%), performance deteriorates substantially for depression--anxiety comorbidity recognition (43.0%) and 12-way differential diagnosis (28.5%); (2) dynamic consultation often underperforms static evaluation, indicating that ineffective information-gathering strategies significantly impair downstream diagnostic reasoning; (3) consultation quality assessed by LLM-as-a-Judge shows only moderate correlation with diagnostic accuracy, suggesting that well-structured questioning alone does not ensure correct diagnostic decisions. We release LingxiDiag-16K and the full evaluation framework to support reproducible research at https://github.com/Lingxi-mental-health/LingxiDiagBench.
years
2026 3representative citing papers
Scoping review of 134 studies on LLM-as-a-Judge in healthcare finds concentration in clinical decision support and NLP, frequent use of OpenAI models with prompt engineering, and moderate-to-strong human alignment where validated.
MedDialBench shows LLMs suffer 1.7-3.4x larger diagnostic accuracy drops from patients fabricating symptoms than withholding them, with fabrication driving super-additive interaction effects across models.
citing papers explorer
-
MentalHospital: A Virtual Environment for Evaluating Psychiatric Clinical Encounters
EHR-derived standardized patients and dual-track evaluation reveal LLMs trail clinicians by 37.28 points on full psychiatric encounters, with mental-status assessment the main bottleneck.
-
LLM-as-a-Judge in Healthcare: A Scoping Analysis of Applications, Methods, and Human Alignment
Scoping review of 134 studies on LLM-as-a-Judge in healthcare finds concentration in clinical decision support and NLP, frequent use of OpenAI models with prompt engineering, and moderate-to-strong human alignment where validated.
-
MedDialBench: Benchmarking LLM Diagnostic Robustness under Parametric Adversarial Patient Behaviors
MedDialBench shows LLMs suffer 1.7-3.4x larger diagnostic accuracy drops from patients fabricating symptoms than withholding them, with fabrication driving super-additive interaction effects across models.