Systemic Failure Modes of Large Language Models in Geriatric Psychiatric Assessment: A Scoping Review.

IF 3.8
Yu-Shiou Lin, Yun-Ting Lee
{"title":"Systemic Failure Modes of Large Language Models in Geriatric Psychiatric Assessment: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Yu-Shiou Lin, Yun-Ting Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.jagp.2026.08.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Large language models (LLMs) show strong performance on medical examinations, yet their reliability in real-world psychogeriatric assessment is uncertain, where delirium, dementia, and late-life depression often coexist amid frailty, polypharmacy, and long clinical histories. We aimed to map empirically evaluated LLM failure modes most relevant to geriatric psychiatric assessment and risk management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic scoping review of empirical evaluations published between January 1, 2023, and December 31, 2025. We searched biomedical and technical sources and included studies that tested LLMs on clinically relevant tasks, including diagnostic reasoning, longitudinal history integration, safety and medication reasoning, and bias-related outcomes. Evidence was charted and synthesized qualitatively to derive a pragmatic taxonomy of recurrent failure patterns.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Four convergent failure modes emerged: (1) diagnostic instability in longitudinal reasoning, including degraded retrieval within long contexts and loss of mid-history cues; (2) adversarial vulnerability, with elevated hallucination under misleading inputs and flawed rationales despite correct final answers; (3) multimodal temporal sparsity in video-based models that can omit brief safety-critical events such as falls; and (4) systemic ageism and value misalignment that can distort clinical narratives, risk estimation, and care recommendations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Current LLM architectures remain insufficient for autonomous geriatric psychiatric assessment. Near-term use should be limited to low-risk support functions with human oversight, structured cognitive forcing safeguards, and evaluation protocols that stress-test longitudinal complexity, adversarial conditions, multimodal safety events, and bias.</p>","PeriodicalId":520785,"journal":{"name":"The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2026.08.016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Large language models (LLMs) show strong performance on medical examinations, yet their reliability in real-world psychogeriatric assessment is uncertain, where delirium, dementia, and late-life depression often coexist amid frailty, polypharmacy, and long clinical histories. We aimed to map empirically evaluated LLM failure modes most relevant to geriatric psychiatric assessment and risk management.

Methods: We conducted a systematic scoping review of empirical evaluations published between January 1, 2023, and December 31, 2025. We searched biomedical and technical sources and included studies that tested LLMs on clinically relevant tasks, including diagnostic reasoning, longitudinal history integration, safety and medication reasoning, and bias-related outcomes. Evidence was charted and synthesized qualitatively to derive a pragmatic taxonomy of recurrent failure patterns.

Results: Forty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Four convergent failure modes emerged: (1) diagnostic instability in longitudinal reasoning, including degraded retrieval within long contexts and loss of mid-history cues; (2) adversarial vulnerability, with elevated hallucination under misleading inputs and flawed rationales despite correct final answers; (3) multimodal temporal sparsity in video-based models that can omit brief safety-critical events such as falls; and (4) systemic ageism and value misalignment that can distort clinical narratives, risk estimation, and care recommendations.

Conclusions: Current LLM architectures remain insufficient for autonomous geriatric psychiatric assessment. Near-term use should be limited to low-risk support functions with human oversight, structured cognitive forcing safeguards, and evaluation protocols that stress-test longitudinal complexity, adversarial conditions, multimodal safety events, and bias.

老年精神病学评估中大语言模型的系统失效模式:范围综述。
背景:大型语言模型(llm)在医学检查中表现出色,但在现实世界的老年心理评估中,其可靠性尚不确定,其中谵妄、痴呆和老年抑郁症经常与虚弱、多种药物和长期临床病史共存。我们的目的是绘制经验评估LLM失效模式最相关的老年精神病学评估和风险管理。方法:我们对2023年1月1日至2025年12月31日期间发表的实证评估进行了系统的范围审查。我们检索了生物医学和技术来源,并纳入了在临床相关任务中测试llm的研究,包括诊断推理、纵向病史整合、安全性和药物推理以及与偏倚相关的结果。证据被绘制成图表并定性地合成,以得出复发性失败模式的实用分类。结果:47项研究符合纳入标准。出现了四种收敛性失效模式:(1)纵向推理的诊断不稳定性,包括长时间背景下检索的退化和中期历史线索的丢失;(2)对抗性脆弱性,尽管最终答案正确,但在误导性输入和有缺陷的理由下,会产生幻觉;(3)基于视频的模型的多模态时间稀疏性,可以忽略短暂的安全关键事件,如跌倒;(4)系统性的年龄歧视和价值错位会扭曲临床叙述、风险评估和护理建议。结论:目前的LLM架构仍然不足以进行自主的老年精神病学评估。近期的使用应限于低风险的支持功能,包括人类监督、结构化的认知强迫保障和评估协议,这些协议可以对纵向复杂性、对抗条件、多模式安全事件和偏见进行压力测试。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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