Synthetic benchmark validation does not transfer to real-data behavior for the tested prompt-level safety operationalizations in clinical LLMs: a multi-model multi-institution evaluation

Background: Organizations evaluating multi-agent LLM systems for clinical use rely on prompt-level safety instructions to constrain these systems. These instructions are typically validated on synthetic benchmarks. Whether such validation transfers to real EHR data has not been tested at scale. Methods: I evaluated four prompt-level safety instruction sets (NIST AI RMF, CHAI Blueprint, WHO AI Ethics, GAIF-4) across four model families (GPT-4o-mini, Llama 4 Maverick, Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-OSS-120b) on 400 synthetic vignettes and 400 ICU summaries (200 MIMIC-IV; 200 from eICU CRD). Total experimental scale: approximately 20,700 pipeline trials plus 1,550 post-hoc severity assessments. Primary outcome: Emergent Misinformation Rate (EMR; distinct from Electronic Medical Record). LLM-extraction validation directly tested and did not support the verbosity confound hypothesis (d=+1.20, p<0.001). Bonferroni applied across six real-EHR comparisons (alpha=0.0083). Results: On synthetic data, the WHO-derived operationalization tested reduced GPT-4o-mini EMR by 48 percent. On real MIMIC-IV (n=200), the same operationalization significantly increased EMR for GPT-4o-mini (+32.4%, d=+0.58, p<0.001), Claude Sonnet 4.6 (+9.9%, d=+0.34, p=0.0006), and GPT-OSS-120b (+8.6%, d=+0.49, p<0.001); Llama 4 showed no significant change. The GPT-4o-mini reversal replicated on eICU (+41.6%, d=+0.68, p<0.001); the Llama 4 eICU result was directional only (+10.3%, p=0.044, did not survive Bonferroni correction). No operationalization tested produced significant EMR reduction in any of the six real-EHR comparisons. Conclusions: Synthetic-validated prompt-level safety instructions either reversed direction (GPT-4o-mini under the WHO-derived operationalization tested, replicated on eICU) or substantially overestimated benefit on real ICU data (Claude, GPT-OSS-120b) for the specific operationalizations tested; no model showed governance benefit on real data across the six real-EHR comparisons. Healthcare organizations evaluating or piloting prompt-level safety instructions on multi-agent clinical LLM systems should empirically validate these operationalizations on real clinical data with model-specific testing before deployment. Independent research. Does not represent the views, policies, or endorsement of Blue Shield of California. No proprietary data used. The author developed GAIF-4, one of the four prompt-level safety instruction sets evaluated; this is disclosed as a competing interest.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-05-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20249501
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Synthetic benchmark validation does not transfer to real-data behavior for the tested prompt-level safety operationalizations in clinical LLMs: a multi-model multi-institution evaluation

Aman sharma
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
preprint

Synthetic benchmark validation does not transfer to real-data behavior for the tested prompt-level safety operationalizations in clinical LLMs: a multi-model multi-institution evaluation

Aman sharma
preprint en

Abstract

Background: Organizations evaluating multi-agent LLM systems for clinical use rely on prompt-level safety instructions to constrain these systems. These instructions are typically validated on synthetic benchmarks. Whether such validation transfers to real EHR data has not been tested at scale. Methods: I evaluated four prompt-level safety instruction sets (NIST AI RMF, CHAI Blueprint, WHO AI Ethics, GAIF-4) across four model families (GPT-4o-mini, Llama 4 Maverick, Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-OSS-120b) on 400 synthetic vignettes and 400 ICU summaries (200 MIMIC-IV; 200 from eICU CRD). Total experimental scale: approximately 20,700 pipeline trials plus 1,550 post-hoc severity assessments. Primary outcome: Emergent Misinformation Rate (EMR; distinct from Electronic Medical Record). LLM-extraction validation directly tested and did not support the verbosity confound hypothesis (d=+1.20, p<0.001). Bonferroni applied across six real-EHR comparisons (alpha=0.0083). Results: On synthetic data, the WHO-derived operationalization tested reduced GPT-4o-mini EMR by 48 percent. On real MIMIC-IV (n=200), the same operationalization significantly increased EMR for GPT-4o-mini (+32.4%, d=+0.58, p<0.001), Claude Sonnet 4.6 (+9.9%, d=+0.34, p=0.0006), and GPT-OSS-120b (+8.6%, d=+0.49, p<0.001); Llama 4 showed no significant change. The GPT-4o-mini reversal replicated on eICU (+41.6%, d=+0.68, p<0.001); the Llama 4 eICU result was directional only (+10.3%, p=0.044, did not survive Bonferroni correction). No operationalization tested produced significant EMR reduction in any of the six real-EHR comparisons. Conclusions: Synthetic-validated prompt-level safety instructions either reversed direction (GPT-4o-mini under the WHO-derived operationalization tested, replicated on eICU) or substantially overestimated benefit on real ICU data (Claude, GPT-OSS-120b) for the specific operationalizations tested; no model showed governance benefit on real data across the six real-EHR comparisons. Healthcare organizations evaluating or piloting prompt-level safety instructions on multi-agent clinical LLM systems should empirically validate these operationalizations on real clinical data with model-specific testing before deployment. Independent research. Does not represent the views, policies, or endorsement of Blue Shield of California. No proprietary data used. The author developed GAIF-4, one of the four prompt-level safety instruction sets evaluated; this is disclosed as a competing interest.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Blue Shield of California Foundation (US)
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
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.