Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42181412›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Persona Routing Associated With Fewer Safety and Monotonicity Violations in Simulated Emergency Large Language Model (LLM) Reasoning.

Yuusuke Harada

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yuusuke HaradaSchool of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, JPN.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate whether persona-routing strategies that combine a LEAN persona with a SAFE persona reduce rule-defined contraindication and sequence safety failures, as well as counterfactual monotonicity violations, while preserving efficiency in simulated emergency clinical reasoning. The study also aimed to determine whether such routing can reduce explicit safety failures and monotonicity violations while keeping resource use close to the lean baseline.

methodsUsing a single ChatGPT deployment (GPT-5.2 Pro; accessed January 2026; San Francisco, CA: OpenAI), we collected Japanese-language persona outputs for 28 synthetic emergency vignettes (56 scenario-level runs) and eight Base/Worse counterfactual pairs (16 comparisons per strategy). We compared four personas (high/low time pressure × LEAN/SAFE) and three routing strategies that escalated from high-time-pressure LEAN persona (P_HL) to high-time-pressure SAFE persona (P_HS) via red flags, dual-run auditing, and optional arbitration. Outputs were constrained to structured JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) and automatically scored for test suggestions, discharge safety-net specificity (0-5), contraindication/sequence safety violations (severity 0-3), and monotonicity violations. Routing outcomes were evaluated as deterministic offline simulations over stored persona outputs; accordingly, reported call counts are simulated expected large language model (LLM) calls rather than separately logged live controller calls.

resultsThe lean baseline suggested the fewest tests (mean: 1.95) but produced safety violations in 8/56 scenarios (14.3%) and monotonicity violations in 10/16 comparisons (62.5%). SAFE personas had 0/56 safety violations and 0/16 monotonicity violations, but suggested more tests (means: 3.38-4.32). Routing eliminated safety violations and reduced monotonicity violations (ROUTER_R1 2/16; ROUTER_R2_CF 0/16) while keeping test counts near the lean baseline in the main router simulation (means: 2.14-2.21) with modest simulated call overhead (ROUTER_R1 1.21 calls; ROUTER_R2_AUDIT 2.00 calls).

conclusionsIn this single-model, synthetic evaluation, persona routing was associated with fewer rule-defined safety violations (14.3-0%) and monotonicity violations (62.5% with LEAN prompting vs. 12.5% with ROUTER_R1 and 0% with ROUTER_R2_CF) while preserving low test-suggestion counts.

Indexed as

clinical decision supportlarge language modelmetamorphic testingmonotonicitypersona promptingroutingsafetytriage

Identifiers

PMID42181412
PMCPMC13197427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.