Japanese Stroke LLM Evaluation: A Conversational Benchmark for Safe Stroke Care in Japanese Using Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Background: Large language models (LLMs) have achieved physician-comparable performance on multiple-choice medical knowledge examinations, but their capabilities in clinical history taking, urgency assessment, and safety remain insufficiently evaluated. We proposed Japanese Stroke LLM Evaluation, a multi-turn conversational benchmark for stroke care in Japanese, and evaluated LLM performance and safety under practice-oriented conditions. Methods: We created 10 stroke and related-condition cases and evaluated LLMs in multi-turn Japanese conversations. The LLM acted as physician, while a board-certified neurosurgeon acted as simulated patient and evaluator. Each case comprised history-taking and action phases scored using pre-specified criteria. Errors that could directly threaten life were defined as critical mistakes. The safety threshold was at least 80% overall with zero critical mistakes. Eighteen models were evaluated in October 2025 and June 2026. Results: Claude Fable 5 achieved the highest score (87.4%) with zero critical mistakes, followed by Claude Opus 4.7 (80.3%) and GLM-5.2 (75.6%). Two leaders met the safety threshold. Eleven models made 17 critical mistakes, including failure to confirm laboratory results or blood glucose before t-PA, surgery before airway stabilization, omission of cervical vascular evaluation, and t-PA outside its indication. History-taking question count correlated with history-taking score (r = 0.648, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Japanese Stroke LLM Evaluation provides a benchmark for LLM performance under practice-oriented conditions, including a cap on history-taking questions. Cases and evaluations were created by neurosurgical specialists rather than using an LLM-as-judge approach. Performance improved across cloud-based and on-premise models in 2026, with some exceeding the safety threshold. Further evaluation using real-world cases is required.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Sep 2026.
Builds on
10 of 19 references.
References · 10
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2020What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Examscited by 1,324
- 2019PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answeringcited by 1,271
- 2022MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answeringcited by 525
- 2025HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Healthcited by 385
- 2023NLP Evaluation in trouble: On the Need to Measure LLM Data Contamination for each Benchmarkcited by 339
- 2024AgentClinic: a multimodal agent benchmark to evaluate AI in simulated clinical environmentscited by 215
- 2024Judging the Judges: Evaluating Alignment and Vulnerabilities in LLMs-as-Judgescited by 197
- 2024MediQ: Question-Asking LLMs and a Benchmark for Reliable Interactive Clinical Reasoningcited by 145
- 2026Active Evidence-Seeking and Diagnostic Reasoning in Large Language Models for Clinical Decision Supportcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.