DischargeSim: A Simulation Benchmark for Educational Doctor-Patient Communication at Discharge

Discharge communication is a critical yet underexplored component of patient care, where the goal shifts from diagnosis to education. While recent large language model (LLM) benchmarks emphasize in-visit diagnostic reasoning, they fail to evaluate models' ability to support patients after the visit. We introduce DischargeSim, a novel benchmark that evaluates LLMs on their ability to act as personalized discharge educators. DischargeSim simulates post-visit, multi-turn conversations between LLM-driven DoctorAgents and PatientAgents with diverse psychosocial profiles (e.g., health literacy, education, emotion). Interactions are structured across six clinically grounded discharge topics and assessed along three axes: (1) dialogue quality via automatic and LLM-as-judge evaluation, (2) personalized document generation including free-text summaries and structured AHRQ checklists, and (3) patient comprehension through a downstream multiple-choice exam. Experiments across 18 LLMs reveal significant gaps in discharge education capability, with performance varying widely across patient profiles. Notably, model size does not always yield better education outcomes, highlighting trade-offs in strategy use and content prioritization. DischargeSim offers a first step toward benchmarking LLMs in post-visit clinical education and promoting equitable, personalized patient support.

MedReadCtrl: Personalizing medical text generation with readability-controlled instruction learning

Generative AI has demonstrated strong potential in healthcare, from clinical decision support to patient-facing chatbots that improve outcomes. A critical challenge for deployment is effective human-AI communication, where content must be both personalized and understandable. We introduce MedReadCtrl, a readability-controlled instruction tuning framework that enables LLMs to adjust output complexity without compromising meaning. Evaluations of nine datasets and three tasks across medical and general domains show that MedReadCtrl achieves significantly lower readability instruction-following errors than GPT-4 (e.g., 1.39 vs. 1.59 on ReadMe, p<0.001) and delivers substantial gains on unseen clinical tasks (e.g., +14.7 ROUGE-L, +6.18 SARI on MTSamples). Experts consistently preferred MedReadCtrl (71.7% vs. 23.3%), especially at low literacy levels. These gains reflect MedReadCtrl's ability to restructure clinical content into accessible, readability-aligned language while preserving medical intent, offering a scalable solution to support patient education and expand equitable access to AI-enabled care.

Enhancing LLMs for Identifying and Prioritizing Important Medical Jargons from Electronic Health Record Notes Utilizing Data Augmentation

OpenNotes enables patients to access EHR notes, but medical jargon can hinder comprehension. To improve understanding, we evaluated closed- and open-source LLMs for extracting and prioritizing key medical terms using prompting, fine-tuning, and data augmentation. We assessed LLMs on 106 expert-annotated EHR notes, experimenting with (i) general vs. structured prompts, (ii) zero-shot vs. few-shot prompting, (iii) fine-tuning, and (iv) data augmentation. To enhance open-source models in low-resource settings, we used ChatGPT for data augmentation and applied ranking techniques. We incrementally increased the augmented dataset size (10 to 10,000) and conducted 5-fold cross-validation, reporting F1 score and Mean Reciprocal Rank (MRR). Our result show that fine-tuning and data augmentation improved performance over other strategies. GPT-4 Turbo achieved the highest F1 (0.433), while Mistral7B with data augmentation had the highest MRR (0.746). Open-source models, when fine-tuned or augmented, outperformed closed-source models. Notably, the best F1 and MRR scores did not always align. Few-shot prompting outperformed zero-shot in vanilla models, and structured prompts yielded different preferences across models. Fine-tuning improved zero-shot performance but sometimes degraded few-shot performance. Data augmentation performed comparably or better than other methods. Our evaluation highlights the effectiveness of prompting, fine-tuning, and data augmentation in improving model performance for medical jargon extraction in low-resource scenarios.

MCQG-SRefine: Multiple Choice Question Generation and Evaluation with Iterative Self-Critique, Correction, and Comparison Feedback

Automatic question generation (QG) is essential for AI and NLP, particularly in intelligent tutoring, dialogue systems, and fact verification. Generating multiple-choice questions (MCQG) for professional exams, like the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE), is particularly challenging, requiring domain expertise and complex multi-hop reasoning for high-quality questions. However, current large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4 struggle with professional MCQG due to outdated knowledge, hallucination issues, and prompt sensitivity, resulting in unsatisfactory quality and difficulty. To address these challenges, we propose MCQG-SRefine, an LLM self-refine-based (Critique and Correction) framework for converting medical cases into high-quality USMLE-style questions. By integrating expert-driven prompt engineering with iterative self-critique and self-correction feedback, MCQG-SRefine significantly enhances human expert satisfaction regarding both the quality and difficulty of the questions. Furthermore, we introduce an LLM-as-Judge-based automatic metric to replace the complex and costly expert evaluation process, ensuring reliable and expert-aligned assessments.

MedQA-CS: Benchmarking Large Language Models Clinical Skills Using an AI-SCE Framework

Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs) in healthcare require advanced clinical skills (CS), yet current benchmarks fail to evaluate these comprehensively. We introduce MedQA-CS, an AI-SCE framework inspired by medical education's Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), to address this gap. MedQA-CS evaluates LLMs through two instruction-following tasks, LLM-as-medical-student and LLM-as-CS-examiner, designed to reflect real clinical scenarios. Our contributions include developing MedQA-CS, a comprehensive evaluation framework with publicly available data and expert annotations, and providing the quantitative and qualitative assessment of LLMs as reliable judges in CS evaluation. Our experiments show that MedQA-CS is a more challenging benchmark for evaluating clinical skills than traditional multiple-choice QA benchmarks (e.g., MedQA). Combined with existing benchmarks, MedQA-CS enables a more comprehensive evaluation of LLMs' clinical capabilities for both open- and closed-source LLMs.