Quantifying the reasoning abilities of LLMs on clinical cases

Recent advances in reasoning-enhanced large language models (LLMs) show promise, yet their application in professional medicine, especially the evaluation of their reasoning process, remains underexplored. We present MedR-Bench, a benchmark of 1453 structured patient cases with reference reasoning derived from clinical case reports, spanning 13 body systems and 10 specialties across common and rare diseases. Our evaluation framework covers three stages of care: examination recommendation, diagnostic decision-making, and treatment planning. To assess reasoning quality, we develop the Reasoning Evaluator, an automated scorer of written reasoning along efficiency, factual accuracy, and completeness. We evaluate seven state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs. Here we show that current models exceed 85% accuracy on simple diagnostic tasks when sufficient examination results are available, but performance drops on examination recommendation and treatment planning. Reasoning is generally factual, yet critical steps are often missing. Open-source models are closing the gap with proprietary systems, highlighting potential for more accessible, equitable clinical AI.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nature Communications
Published
2025-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-64769-1
Citations
17
Primary Topic
Topic Modeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
42.18
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Quantifying the reasoning abilities of LLMs on clinical cases

Cheng Peng, Yanjie Fan, Zhuoxia Chen, Hongfei Gu et al.
17 citations
Nature Communications
Topic Modeling
42.18
article

Quantifying the reasoning abilities of LLMs on clinical cases

Cheng Peng, Yanjie Fan, Zhuoxia Chen, Hongfei Gu, Weidi Xie, Chaoyi Wu, Ya Zhang, Yanfeng Wang, Shuyu Liu, Weike Zhao, Pengcheng Qiu
article en
17 citations

Abstract

Recent advances in reasoning-enhanced large language models (LLMs) show promise, yet their application in professional medicine, especially the evaluation of their reasoning process, remains underexplored. We present MedR-Bench, a benchmark of 1453 structured patient cases with reference reasoning derived from clinical case reports, spanning 13 body systems and 10 specialties across common and rare diseases. Our evaluation framework covers three stages of care: examination recommendation, diagnostic decision-making, and treatment planning. To assess reasoning quality, we develop the Reasoning Evaluator, an automated scorer of written reasoning along efficiency, factual accuracy, and completeness. We evaluate seven state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs. Here we show that current models exceed 85% accuracy on simple diagnostic tasks when sufficient examination results are available, but performance drops on examination recommendation and treatment planning. Reasoning is generally factual, yet critical steps are often missing. Open-source models are closing the gap with proprietary systems, highlighting potential for more accessible, equitable clinical AI.

Nature CommunicationsVol. 16(1)
China Mobile (China) (CN), Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN), XinHua Hospital (CN), Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence (CN), Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Topic Modeling
42.18
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.