Hyeonhoon Lee

Vikash Gupta, Barbaros Selnur Erdal, Carolina Ramirez et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become commonplace to solve routine everyday tasks. Because of the exponential growth in medical imaging data volume and complexity, the workload on radiologists is steadily increasing. We project that the gap between the number of imaging exams and the number of expert radiologist readers required to cover this increase will continue to expand, consequently introducing a demand for AI-based tools that improve the efficiency with which radiologists can comfortably interpret these exams. AI has been shown to improve efficiency in medical-image generation, processing, and interpretation, and a variety of such AI models have been developed across research labs worldwide. However, very few of these, if any, find their way into routine clinical use, a discrepancy that reflects the divide between AI research and successful AI translation. To address the barrier to clinical deployment, we have formed MONAI Consortium, an open-source community which is building standards for AI deployment in healthcare institutions, and developing tools and infrastructure to facilitate their implementation. This report represents several years of weekly discussions and hands-on problem solving experience by groups of industry experts and clinicians in the MONAI Consortium. We identify barriers between AI-model development in research labs and subsequent clinical deployment and propose solutions. Our report provides guidance on processes which take an imaging AI model from development to clinical implementation in a healthcare institution. We discuss various AI integration points in a clinical Radiology workflow. We also present a taxonomy of Radiology AI use-cases. Through this report, we intend to educate the stakeholders in healthcare and AI (AI researchers, radiologists, imaging informaticists, and regulators) about cross-disciplinary challenges and possible solutions.

Thomas Sounack, Raffaele Giancotti, Catherine A. Gao et al.

Analytical code is essential for reproducing diagnostic and prognostic prediction model research, yet code availability in the published literature remains limited. While the TRIPOD statements set standards for reporting prediction model methods, they do not define explicit standards for repository structure and documentation. This review quantifies current code-sharing practices to inform the development of TRIPOD-Code, a TRIPOD extension reporting guideline focused on code sharing. We conducted a scoping review of PubMed-indexed articles citing TRIPOD or TRIPOD+AI as of Aug 11, 2025, restricted to studies retrievable via the PubMed Central Open Access API. Eligible studies developed, updated, or validated multivariable prediction models. A large language model-assisted pipeline was developed to screen articles and extract code availability statements and repository links. Repositories were assessed with the same LLM against 14 predefined reproducibility-related features. Our code is made publicly available. Among 3,967 eligible articles, 12.2% included code sharing statements. Code sharing increased over time, reaching 15.8% in 2025, and was higher among TRIPOD+AI-citing studies than TRIPOD-citing studies. Sharing prevalence varied widely by journal and country. Repository assessment showed substantial heterogeneity in reproducibility features: most repositories contained a README file (80.5%), but fewer specified dependencies (37.6%; version-constrained 21.6%) or were modular (42.4%). In prediction model research, code sharing remains relatively uncommon, and when shared, often falls short of being reusable. These findings provide an empirical baseline for the TRIPOD-Code extension and underscore the need for clearer expectations beyond code availability, including documentation, dependency specification, licensing, and executable structure.

Yubin Kim, Chanwoo Park, Hyewon Jeong et al. · mit

Foundation models are becoming valuable tools in medicine. Yet despite their promise, the best way to leverage Large Language Models (LLMs) in complex medical tasks remains an open question. We introduce a novel multi-agent framework, named Medical Decision-making Agents (MDAgents) that helps address this gap by automatically assigning a collaboration structure to a team of LLMs. The assigned solo or group collaboration structure is tailored to the medical task at hand, emulating real-world medical decision-making processes adapted to tasks of varying complexities. We evaluate our framework and baseline methods using state-of-the-art LLMs across a suite of real-world medical knowledge and medical diagnosis benchmarks, including a comparison of LLMs' medical complexity classification against human physicians. MDAgents achieved the best performance in seven out of ten benchmarks on tasks requiring an understanding of medical knowledge and multi-modal reasoning, showing a significant improvement of up to 4.2% (p < 0.05) compared to previous methods' best performances. Ablation studies reveal that MDAgents effectively determines medical complexity to optimize for efficiency and accuracy across diverse medical tasks. Notably, the combination of moderator review and external medical knowledge in group collaboration resulted in an average accuracy improvement of 11.8%. Our code can be found at https://github.com/mitmedialab/MDAgents.

Taehun Kim, Hyeryun Park, Hyeonhoon Lee et al.

Clinical data-driven research requires clinical expertise, programming skills, access to patient data, and extensive documentation, creating barriers and slowing the pace for clinicians and external researchers. To address this, we developed the Clinical Agentic Research Intelligence System (CARIS) that automates the workflow: research planning, literature search, cohort construction, Institutional Review Board (IRB) documentation, Vibe Machine Learning (ML), and report generation, with human-in-the-loop refinement. CARIS integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) with modular tools through the Model Context Protocol (MCP), enabling natural language-driven research without coding while allowing users to access only outputs. We evaluated CARIS on three heterogeneous datasets with distinct clinical tasks, where it completed planning and IRB documentation within four iterations, supported Vibe ML, and generated reports, achieving 96% completeness in LLM-based evaluation and 82% in human evaluation. CARIS demonstrates potential to reduce documentation burden and technical barriers, accelerating data-driven clinical research across public and private data environments.

Yubin Kim, Hyewon Jeong, Shan Chen et al.

Hallucinations in foundation models arise from autoregressive training objectives that prioritize token-likelihood optimization over epistemic accuracy, fostering overconfidence and poorly calibrated uncertainty. We define medical hallucination as any model-generated output that is factually incorrect, logically inconsistent, or unsupported by authoritative clinical evidence in ways that could alter clinical decisions. We evaluated 11 foundation models (7 general-purpose, 4 medical-specialized) across seven medical hallucination tasks spanning medical reasoning and biomedical information retrieval. General-purpose models achieved significantly higher proportions of hallucination-free responses than medical-specialized models (median: 76.6% vs 51.3%, difference = 25.2%, 95% CI: 18.7-31.3%, Mann-Whitney U = 27.0, p = 0.012, rank-biserial r = -0.64). Top-performing models such as Gemini-2.5 Pro exceeded 97% accuracy when augmented with chain-of-thought prompting (base: 87.6%), while medical-specialized models like MedGemma ranged from 28.6-61.9% despite explicit training on medical corpora. Chain-of-thought reasoning significantly reduced hallucinations in 86.4% of tested comparisons after FDR correction (q < 0.05), demonstrating that explicit reasoning traces enable self-verification and error detection. Physician audits confirmed that 64-72% of residual hallucinations stemmed from causal or temporal reasoning failures rather than knowledge gaps. A global survey of clinicians (n = 70) validated real-world impact: 91.8% had encountered medical hallucinations, and 84.7% considered them capable of causing patient harm. The underperformance of medical-specialized models despite domain training indicates that safety emerges from sophisticated reasoning capabilities and broad knowledge integration developed during large-scale pre-training, not from narrow optimization.

Yubin Kim, Chanwoo Park, Hyewon Jeong et al.

Medical Decision-Making (MDM) is a multi-faceted process that requires clinicians to assess complex multi-modal patient data patient, often collaboratively. Large Language Models (LLMs) promise to streamline this process by synthesizing vast medical knowledge and multi-modal health data. However, single-agent are often ill-suited for nuanced medical contexts requiring adaptable, collaborative problem-solving. Our MDAgents addresses this need by dynamically assigning collaboration structures to LLMs based on task complexity, mimicking real-world clinical collaboration and decision-making. This framework improves diagnostic accuracy and supports adaptive responses in complex, real-world medical scenarios, making it a valuable tool for clinicians in various healthcare settings, and at the same time, being more efficient in terms of computing cost than static multi-agent decision making methods.

Yubin Kim, Zhiyuan Hu, Hyewon Jeong et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) as clinical agents require careful behavioral adaptation. While adept at reactive tasks (e.g., diagnosis reasoning), LLMs often struggle with proactive engagement, like unprompted identification of critical missing information or risks. We introduce BehaviorBench, a comprehensive dataset to evaluate agent behaviors across a clinical assistance spectrum, ranging from reactive query responses to proactive interventions (e.g., clarifying ambiguities, flagging overlooked critical data). Our BehaviorBench experiments reveal LLMs' inconsistent proactivity. To address this, we propose BehaviorSFT, a novel training strategy using behavioral tokens to explicitly condition LLMs for dynamic behavioral selection along this spectrum. BehaviorSFT boosts performance, achieving up to 97.3% overall Macro F1 on BehaviorBench and improving proactive task scores (e.g., from 95.0% to 96.5% for Qwen2.5-7B-Ins). Crucially, blind clinician evaluations confirmed BehaviorSFT-trained agents exhibit more realistic clinical behavior, striking a superior balance between helpful proactivity (e.g., timely, relevant suggestions) and necessary restraint (e.g., avoiding over-intervention) versus standard fine-tuning or explicit instructed agents.

Yubin Kim, Taehan Kim, Wonjune Kang et al.

Vocal health plays a crucial role in peoples' lives, significantly impacting their communicative abilities and interactions. However, despite the global prevalence of voice disorders, many lack access to convenient diagnosis and treatment. This paper introduces VocalAgent, an audio large language model (LLM) to address these challenges through vocal health diagnosis. We leverage Qwen-Audio-Chat fine-tuned on three datasets collected in-situ from hospital patients, and present a multifaceted evaluation framework encompassing a safety assessment to mitigate diagnostic biases, cross-lingual performance analysis, and modality ablation studies. VocalAgent demonstrates superior accuracy on voice disorder classification compared to state-of-the-art baselines. Its LLM-based method offers a scalable solution for broader adoption of health diagnostics, while underscoring the importance of ethical and technical validation.

Yubin Kim, Hyewon Jeong, Chanwoo Park et al.

Large language models (LLMs) deployed as agents introduce significant safety risks in clinical settings due to their potential for error and single points of failure. We introduce Tiered Agentic Oversight (TAO), a hierarchical multi-agent system that enhances AI safety through layered, automated supervision. Inspired by clinical hierarchies (e.g., nurse-physician-specialist) in hospital, TAO routes tasks to specialized agents based on complexity, creating a robust safety framework through automated inter- and intra-tier communication and role-playing. Crucially, this hierarchical structure functions as an effective error-correction mechanism, absorbing up to 24% of individual agent errors before they can compound. Our experiments reveal TAO outperforms single-agent and other multi-agent systems on 4 out of 5 healthcare safety benchmarks, with up to an 8.2% improvement. Ablation studies confirm key design principles of the system: (i) its adaptive architecture is over 3% safer than static, single-tier configurations, and (ii) its lower tiers are indispensable, as their removal causes the most significant degradation in overall safety. Finally, we validated the system's synergy with human doctors in a user study where a physician, acting as the highest tier agent, provided corrective feedback that improved medical triage accuracy from 40% to 60%. Project Page: https://tiered-agentic-oversight.github.io/