# Truth, Trust, and Trouble: Medical AI on the Edge

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.02983 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02983/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 24 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 1 Jul 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [Large Language Models Encode Clinical Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.13138/) (2022)
- [PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.06146/) (2019)
- [BioMistral: A Collection of Open-Source Pretrained Large Language Models for Medical Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10373/) (2024)
- [AlpaCare:Instruction-tuned Large Language Models for Medical Application](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.14558/) (2023)
- [Diagnosing and Addressing Pitfalls in KG-RAG Datasets: Toward More Reliable Benchmarking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23495/) (2025)
- [Digital Diagnostics: The Potential Of Large Language Models In Recognizing Symptoms Of Common Illnesses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.06712/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Do Large Language Models Reflect Demographic Pluralism in Safety?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.07376/) (2026)
- [Do Clinical Question Answering Systems Really Need Specialised Medical Fine Tuning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.12812/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) hold significant promise for transforming digital health by enabling automated medical question answering. However, ensuring these models meet critical industry standards for factual accuracy, usefulness, and safety remains a challenge, especially for open-source solutions. We present a rigorous benchmarking framework using a dataset of over 1,000 health questions. We assess model performance across honesty, helpfulness, and harmlessness. Our results highlight trade-offs between factual reliability and safety among evaluated models -- Mistral-7B, BioMistral-7B-DARE, and AlpaCare-13B. AlpaCare-13B achieves the highest accuracy (91.7%) and harmlessness (0.92), while domain-specific tuning in BioMistral-7B-DARE boosts safety (0.90) despite its smaller scale. Few-shot prompting improves accuracy from 78% to 85%, and all models show reduced helpfulness on complex queries, highlighting ongoing challenges in clinical QA.