Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

A Proposed Rubric for Evaluating Expressed Clinical Reasoning in Large Language Model Responses

We propose a rubric for assessing expressed clinical reasoning in model responses, drawing on three bodies of work: medical education assessment frameworks (ART, SCT, Key Feature Problems and OSCE); clinical LLM benchmarks (MedR-Bench, HealthBench, TIMER-Bench, DR. BENCH, PrIME-LLM and PatientSafeBench); and general LLM reasoning evaluation research, including the Factuality-Validity-Coherence-Utility taxonomy, FaithCoT-Bench and C2-Faith. We use groundedness as a clinically oriented adaptation of the taxonomy's factuality category. The rubric brings these concepts together in a multidimensional framework for scoring free-text responses to gold-standard clinical vignettes. It includes pro...

AuthorsZhangshu Joshua Jiang, Zina Ibrahim, James T. Teo
Primary categorycs.CL
Published29 September 2026
Last updated at source1 October 2026
cs.CLcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/ef9854ea-50eb-4af7-b83c-7d7ac312a52c" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.