{"title":"Clinical warrant in medical LLM evaluation.","authors":"Murat Sariyar","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2026.1918724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Medical large language models are evaluated through factuality, physician preference, source support, retrieval quality, safety, and clinical utility. These measures describe content and performance while leaving unresolved whether a generated claim meets the requirements for a specified clinical use. This article proposes <i>clinical warrant</i> as a use-specific judgment for a particular output-use pair. Clinical use includes reliance within a patient-related encounter, task, or care pathway, including education that can shape understanding or later action. The proposed use and the standards used to judge it are documented separately. For action-guiding outputs, clinical appropriateness is a gateway. Five further conditions examine role, case information, evidence, preserved limits, and authority/accountability. The framework asks whether these requirements are met at the point of proposed reliance, records failed or unresolved conditions and the resulting disposition, and tests whether a relevant change stops or redirects use. Fifteen constructed examples across five domains distinguish established, not established, and indeterminate warrant.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":"8 ","pages":"1918724"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13601723/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2026.1918724","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Medical large language models are evaluated through factuality, physician preference, source support, retrieval quality, safety, and clinical utility. These measures describe content and performance while leaving unresolved whether a generated claim meets the requirements for a specified clinical use. This article proposes clinical warrant as a use-specific judgment for a particular output-use pair. Clinical use includes reliance within a patient-related encounter, task, or care pathway, including education that can shape understanding or later action. The proposed use and the standards used to judge it are documented separately. For action-guiding outputs, clinical appropriateness is a gateway. Five further conditions examine role, case information, evidence, preserved limits, and authority/accountability. The framework asks whether these requirements are met at the point of proposed reliance, records failed or unresolved conditions and the resulting disposition, and tests whether a relevant change stops or redirects use. Fifteen constructed examples across five domains distinguish established, not established, and indeterminate warrant.