ArticleCell reports. Medicine2026
A S.C.O.R.E. framework for evaluating open-ended responses from large language models in healthcare.
Article in Cell reports. Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Domain-specific evaluation is essential for clinical validation. We propose S.C.O.R.E. (Safety, Consensus & Context, Objectivity, Reproducibility, Explainability), a five-dimensional framework for structured expert evaluation of LLM-generated healthcare responses. S.C.O.R.E. has been validated against quantitative metrics (BLEU, ROUGE, and BERTScore) using three LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude 4 Sonnet, and DeepSeek) across ophthalmology, medication, and anesthesia. While quantitative metrics frequently misclassified clinically appropriate responses as inaccurate, S.C.O.R.E. demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.745) in the hyperparameter-optimized domain and detected large effect sizes (Cliff's δ 0.68-0.92) reflecting optimization status. Model rankings reversed across specialties-GPT-4o excelled in ophthalmology (optimized domain), while others in non-optimized domains-thus domain-specific tuning is both necessary and detectable through expert evaluation. S.C.O.R.E.'s correlation between framework reliability and optimization status validates its utility for iterative model refinement. This structured approach enables practical clinical validation, providing actionable feedback for developers and supporting regulatory compliance through standardized documentation of safety, evidence alignment, and explainability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.