Contextualizing Clinical Benchmarks: A Tripartite Approach to Evaluating LLM-Based Tools in Mental Health Settings.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
Matthew Flathers, Bridget Dwyer, Eden Rozenblit, John Torous
{"title":"Contextualizing Clinical Benchmarks: A Tripartite Approach to Evaluating LLM-Based Tools in Mental Health Settings.","authors":"Matthew Flathers, Bridget Dwyer, Eden Rozenblit, John Torous","doi":"10.1097/PRA.0000000000000892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rapid proliferation of Large Language Model (LLM)-based tools in mental health care presents an urgent need for clinical evaluation frameworks. With millions already engaging with Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, mental health disciplines require immediate, practical evaluation approaches rather than awaiting idealized methodologies. This paper introduces a practical, implementable approach to evaluating LLM-based tools in mental health settings through both theoretical analysis and actionable assessment methods. We propose a tripartite evaluation framework comprising: (1) the technical profile layer, which assesses foundational model safety and infrastructure compliance; (2) the health care knowledge layer, which validates domain-specific clinical knowledge and safety boundaries; and (3) the clinical reasoning layer, which evaluates decision-making capabilities and reasoning processes. Each proposed layer includes concrete evaluation methods that clinical teams can implement immediately, from direct model questioning to adversarial testing approaches. As health care organizations conduct and share evaluations using this approach, the field can collectively develop the specialized benchmarks and reasoning assessments essential for ensuring LLM integrations enhance rather than compromise patient care in the mental health space. The framework serves both as an immediate practical guide and a foundation for building more sophisticated evaluation resources tailored to mental health contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":16909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","volume":"31 6","pages":"294-301"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychiatric Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRA.0000000000000892","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rapid proliferation of Large Language Model (LLM)-based tools in mental health care presents an urgent need for clinical evaluation frameworks. With millions already engaging with Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, mental health disciplines require immediate, practical evaluation approaches rather than awaiting idealized methodologies. This paper introduces a practical, implementable approach to evaluating LLM-based tools in mental health settings through both theoretical analysis and actionable assessment methods. We propose a tripartite evaluation framework comprising: (1) the technical profile layer, which assesses foundational model safety and infrastructure compliance; (2) the health care knowledge layer, which validates domain-specific clinical knowledge and safety boundaries; and (3) the clinical reasoning layer, which evaluates decision-making capabilities and reasoning processes. Each proposed layer includes concrete evaluation methods that clinical teams can implement immediately, from direct model questioning to adversarial testing approaches. As health care organizations conduct and share evaluations using this approach, the field can collectively develop the specialized benchmarks and reasoning assessments essential for ensuring LLM integrations enhance rather than compromise patient care in the mental health space. The framework serves both as an immediate practical guide and a foundation for building more sophisticated evaluation resources tailored to mental health contexts.

情境化临床基准:评估心理健康设置中基于法学硕士的工具的三方方法。
基于大语言模型(LLM)的工具在精神卫生保健中的迅速扩散,迫切需要临床评估框架。随着数百万人已经使用人工智能(AI)工具,心理健康学科需要即时、实用的评估方法,而不是等待理想化的方法。本文介绍了一种实用的、可实施的方法,通过理论分析和可操作的评估方法来评估心理健康环境中基于法学硕士的工具。我们提出了一个三方评估框架,包括:(1)技术概况层,评估基础模型的安全性和基础设施的合规性;(2)卫生保健知识层,用于验证特定领域的临床知识和安全边界;(3)临床推理层,评估决策能力和推理过程。每个提议的层都包括临床团队可以立即实施的具体评估方法,从直接的模型质疑到对抗性测试方法。随着卫生保健组织使用这种方法进行和共享评估,该领域可以共同制定专业基准和推理评估,这对于确保法学硕士整合增强而不是损害精神卫生领域的患者护理至关重要。该框架既可作为直接的实用指南,又可作为构建针对精神卫生情况的更复杂的评估资源的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
159
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Psychiatric Practice® seizes the day with its emphasis on the three Rs — readability, reliability, and relevance. Featuring an eye-catching style, the journal combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with practical and informative tips for treating patients. Mental health professionals will want access to this review journal — for sharpening their clinical skills, discovering the best in treatment, and navigating this rapidly changing field. Journal of Psychiatric Practice combines clinically applicable reviews, case studies, and articles on treatment advances with informative "how to" tips for surviving in a managed care environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书