Papers for

healthcare chatbot developers

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Gender cues influence ADHD self-diagnosis responses in GPT models

Gender Associations in LLM-Mediated ADHD Self-Diagnosis

Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for medical self-diagnosis. However, the way demographic cues shape outputs in these interactions remains poorly understood. This is particularly consequential for diagnoses like ADHD, where persistent gender disparities are not fully aligned with the clinical evidence. We adapt the Context Association Test (CAT) to evaluate whether GPT-4o responds to gendered ADHD associations in a zero-shot, self-diagnostic setting. We show that explicit cueing consistently amplifies certain ADHD subtype associations while implicit cueing produces near proxy-aligned distributions. These divergences suggest that explicit demographic cues may activate bias-mitigation mechanisms that over-correct rather than eliminate bias, whereas implicit cues appear to reflect the model's default behavior. Our results demonstrate that evaluating gendered bias in LLM-mediated self-diagnosis requires careful attention to the demographic associations a model encodes.

Sat 24 OctComputation and LanguageComputers and Society
The gist
Large language models like GPT are used by people to help self-diagnose medical conditions such as ADHD. This study looked at how gender hints given to the model affect its ADHD diagnosis answers. The authors found that explicitly telling the model about gender changes the kind of ADHD it associates with more than just implying it indirectly. These findings show that the model’s responses can include biases tied to gender, and the way these cues are given matters.
Open → 2610.33697v1

Persistent memory in language agents increases privacy leak risks over time

Disclosure Begets Disclosure: A Self-Reinforcing Privacy Loop in LLM Agents with Persistent Memory

Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly use persistent memory to personalize responses, and personal attributes in this memory pose a privacy risk if exposed. We ask how consulting memory during dialogue changes what users go on to say, and thus what the memory comes to reveal. In multi-session simulations, a simulated user with 24 personal attributes talks with a support agent that does or does not consult memory, and in both settings attributes are inferred from the full accumulated record. Across four support models, memory raises response quality but also empirical leakage, the share of attribute values correctly inferred from the record, by a margin that widens over sessions. The cause is a loop in ordinary, non-adversarial assistance. Memory-conditioned responses carry earlier values forward, often as presuppositions, and users affirm them or leave them uncorrected, so that cues and the agent's own guesses become recorded values. The loop reinforces itself, and removing the agent's mentions of an attribute lowers its later disclosure about twice as much as single-turn effects predict. Users cannot leave it on their own, since correcting a value discloses the attribute, declining to discuss it shifts later predictions toward sensitive values, and incorrect values left in place become entrenched. The loop is best weakened at the agent's response. Instructing the agent not to state or presuppose attributes brings leakage to about the no-memory level while keeping most of the quality gains, whereas filtering or anonymizing what users say or what is stored gives up much of them.

Tue 20 OctCryptography and SecurityComputation and LanguageMachine Learning
The gist
When AI language agents remember personal details over many conversations to improve answers, this memory can cause privacy problems. The authors found that the more an agent recalls and mentions user details, the more users end up sharing or confirming these details, making the information easier to guess later. This creates a feedback loop where the agent’s guesses get recorded and repeated, increasing privacy risks. The problem can be reduced by instructing agents not to mention or assume personal details, keeping quality high but limiting data leaks.
Open → 2610.28315v1

Jev model improves clinical triage probability accuracy and safety

Native Probability Outputs for Clinical Triage: An Evaluation of Calibration and Decision Accuracy

Abstract: Patient-facing triage requires an appropriate care recommendation and recognition of when information is insufficient. We evaluate whether Jev, a decision model that returns probabilities over predefined actions, supports both judgments. Using CARE-Bench, we compare Jev with four general-purpose language models and three input-independent baselines across 925 decision points from 439 public cases. On the public test subset, Jev ranks fourth of five models by macro-F1 (0.461) but has the lowest observed multiclass Brier score (0.610), an 18.7\% improvement over uniform prediction (case-bootstrap 95\% interval, 4.9--31.1\%). Noul has lower binary Brier than Choice (0.215 versus 0.276). A evaluation of 453 HealthBench conversations again gives Jev the lowest observed Brier score (0.299), but measures a distinct emergency-referral judgment. Jev combines lower probability error with missed clarification needs in the four-action task. Asking about information sufficiency separately increases recall but also produces frequent unnecessary clarification assignments.

Sat 17 OctMachine Learning
The gist
Accurate advice in patient triage is important, especially when more information might be needed. The authors tested Jev, a model that gives probabilities for different advice options, to see if it helps make better decisions and know when to ask questions. Jev performed better than other tested models in giving well-calibrated probabilities and reducing mistakes when deciding if enough info was available. However, asking separately about information needs helped catch more unclear cases but caused too many unnecessary questions.
Open → 2610.24692v1

Medical fact verification improves with snippet level clinical grouping

MedSNIP: Building and Benchmarking Snippet-Level Granularity for Medical Fact Verification

Abstract: A medical claim's correctness often depends not on the claim alone, but on the clinical structure around it. A claim may require a lab reference range, a causal or conditional link, or patient-specific details to be judged correctly, and atom-level decomposition can fragment these dependencies, leaving the verifier with clinically incomplete claims. We reformulate medical fact-checking around snippet-level verification, where clause-grouped units preserve local clinical structure. We introduce MedSNIP-Bench, a human-annotated benchmark for snippet-level medical fact verification, and MedSNIP, an automatic snippet-generation pipeline. MedSNIP-Bench covers 276 consumer-health and clinical-vignette responses, segmented into 2,524 snippets with dual in-general and in-patient-context labels and six structural pattern codes. MedSNIP is evaluated against human snippet boundaries on MedSNIP-Bench and then used to generate snippet-level units for external corpora. Across MedSNIP-Bench, HealthFC, and MedHallu, snippet-level verification preserves or improves false-class F1, with gains concentrated where answers are long enough to fragment and where the verifier is strong enough to exploit the recovered structure. The largest merge-pattern gain is on causal-conditional clinical chains. It also reduces verifier calls by 24-73%, though the saving survives end-to-end only when decomposition is cheap, which an open-weight decomposer makes possible at no loss of chunking fidelity.

Fri 11 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
Medical claims often depend on detailed clinical context, like lab results or patient-specific factors, to be judged correctly. The authors propose checking claims by splitting them into meaningful snippet units that keep clinical details together, instead of breaking them into too small pieces. They created a new dataset and a method for automatically generating these snippets, which helps improve the accuracy of verifying medical facts. This approach reduces unnecessary checks and works especially well for complex medical claims with causal or conditional relationships.
Open → 2609.12884v1

EmoMed adapts medical advice using emotions and updated facts

EmoMed: An Emotionally-Aware Agent for Multimodal Medical Support with Real-Time Information Retrieval

Abstract: We present EmoMed - a multimodal medical consultation agent that adapts its responses based on users' emotional states while maintaining clinical accuracy. The system processes text and medical images, detects affect indicators (anxiety, confusion, urgency) from user input, and adjusts response tone, structure, and detail level accordingly. To ensure factual reliability, the agent grounds clinical information through a dual retrieval mechanism: web-based fact-checking and an API-connected, continuously updated medical knowledge base. We evaluate our approach across seven state-of-the-art language models (GPT-4/5, Qwen3, Llama 4, Gemini 2.5, Grok4, Claude3) using comprehensive metrics including LLM-as-judge assessments, MedQA style accuracy tests, BERT Score, safety/helpfulness ratings, and multimodal medical benchmarks. The results demonstrate that emotionally adaptive responses consistently outperform neutral baseline across evaluation dimensions, without compromising clinical accuracy. A controlled user study validated these findings, with participants reporting improved perceived empathy and communication clarity, while maintaining trust in factual accuracy. Source code: https://github.com/NasonovIvan/EmoMed-Agent

Mon 7 SeptArtificial IntelligenceComputers and SocietyHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Medical advice can be hard to understand and sometimes not sensitive enough to how a person feels. The authors created EmoMed, a smart helper that reads your words and medical images, notices if you seem worried or confused, and changes how it talks to you to feel more caring and clear. It double-checks facts from the web and a medical database to give accurate answers. Tests show EmoMed works better than usual helpers without losing accuracy, and people say its answers feel more empathetic and easier to understand.
Open → 2609.07194v1