REVIEW 1 cited by
Building a Human-Verified Clinical Reasoning Dataset via a Human LLM Hybrid Pipeline for Trustworthy Medical AI
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Building a Human-Verified Clinical Reasoning Dataset via a Human LLM Hybrid Pipeline for Trustworthy Medical AI
read the original abstract
Despite strong performance in medical question-answering, the clinical adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) is critically hampered by their opaque 'black-box' reasoning, limiting clinician trust. This challenge is compounded by the predominant reliance of current medical LLMs on corpora from scientific literature or synthetic data, which often lack the granular expert validation and high clinical relevance essential for advancing their specialized medical capabilities. To address these critical gaps, we introduce a highly clinically relevant dataset with 31,247 medical question-answer pairs, each accompanied by expert-validated chain-of-thought (CoT) explanations. This resource, spanning multiple clinical domains, was curated via a scalable human-LLM hybrid pipeline: LLM-generated rationales were iteratively reviewed, scored, and refined by medical experts against a structured rubric, with substandard outputs revised through human effort or guided LLM regeneration until expert consensus. This publicly available dataset provides a vital source for the development of medical LLMs that capable of transparent and verifiable reasoning, thereby advancing safer and more interpretable AI in medicine.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
CLR-voyance: Reinforcing Open-Ended Reasoning for Inpatient Clinical Decision Support with Outcome-Aware Rubrics
CLR-voyance reformulates inpatient reasoning as POMDP with clinician-validated outcome rubrics, yielding an 8B model that outperforms larger frontier models on the authors' new benchmark.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.