Kabilan Elangovan

Ting Fang Tan, Kabilan Elangovan, Jasmine Ong et al.

A comprehensive qualitative evaluation framework for large language models (LLM) in healthcare that expands beyond traditional accuracy and quantitative metrics needed. We propose 5 key aspects for evaluation of LLMs: Safety, Consensus, Objectivity, Reproducibility and Explainability (S.C.O.R.E.). We suggest that S.C.O.R.E. may form the basis for an evaluation framework for future LLM-based models that are safe, reliable, trustworthy, and ethical for healthcare and clinical applications.

Ting Fang Tan, Kabilan Elangovan, Andreas Pollreisz et al.

Domain specific large language models are increasingly used to support patient education, triage, and clinical decision making in ophthalmology, making rigorous evaluation essential to ensure safety and accuracy. This study evaluated four small medical LLMs Meerkat-7B, BioMistral-7B, OpenBioLLM-8B, and MedLLaMA3-v20 in answering ophthalmology related patient queries and assessed the feasibility of LLM based evaluation against clinician grading. In this cross sectional study, 180 ophthalmology patient queries were answered by each model, generating 2160 responses. Models were selected for parameter sizes under 10 billion to enable resource efficient deployment. Responses were evaluated by three ophthalmologists of differing seniority and by GPT-4-Turbo using the S.C.O.R.E. framework assessing safety, consensus and context, objectivity, reproducibility, and explainability, with ratings assigned on a five point Likert scale. Agreement between LLM and clinician grading was assessed using Spearman rank correlation, Kendall tau statistics, and kernel density estimate analyses. Meerkat-7B achieved the highest performance with mean scores of 3.44 from Senior Consultants, 4.08 from Consultants, and 4.18 from Residents. MedLLaMA3-v20 performed poorest, with 25.5 percent of responses containing hallucinations or clinically misleading content, including fabricated terminology. GPT-4-Turbo grading showed strong alignment with clinician assessments overall, with Spearman rho of 0.80 and Kendall tau of 0.67, though Senior Consultants graded more conservatively. Overall, medical LLMs demonstrated potential for safe ophthalmic question answering, but gaps remained in clinical depth and consensus, supporting the feasibility of LLM based evaluation for large scale benchmarking and the need for hybrid automated and clinician review frameworks to guide safe clinical deployment.

Kabilan Elangovan, Daniel Ting

Class Activation Mapping (CAM) methods are widely used to generate visual explanations for deep learning classifiers in medical imaging. However, existing evaluation frameworks assess whether explanations are correct, measured by localisation fidelity against radiologist annotations, rather than whether they are consistent: whether the model applies the same spatial reasoning strategy across different patients with the same pathology. We propose the C-Score (Consistency Score), a confidence-weighted, annotation-free metric that quantifies intra-class explanation reproducibility via intensity-emphasised pairwise soft IoU across correctly classified instances. We evaluate six CAM techniques: GradCAM, GradCAM++, LayerCAM, EigenCAM, ScoreCAM, and MS GradCAM++ across three CNN architectures (DenseNet201, InceptionV3, ResNet50V2) over thirty training epochs on the Kermany chest X-ray dataset, covering transfer learning and fine-tuning phases. We identify three distinct mechanisms of AUC-consistency dissociation, invisible to standard classification metrics: threshold-mediated gold list collapse, technique-specific attribution collapse at peak AUC, and class-level consistency masking in global aggregation. C-Score provides an early warning signal of impending model instability. ScoreCAM deterioration on ResNet50V2 is detectable one full checkpoint before catastrophic AUC collapse and yields architecture-specific clinical deployment recommendations grounded in explanation quality rather than predictive ranking alone.

Kabilan Elangovan, Daniel Ting

Transfer learning followed by fine-tuning is widely adopted in medical image classification due to consistent gains in diagnostic performance. However, in multi-class settings with overlapping visual features, improvements in accuracy do not guarantee stability of the visual evidence used to support predictions. We define semantic drift as systematic changes in the attribution structure supporting a model's predictions between transfer learning and full fine-tuning, reflecting potential shifts in underlying visual reasoning despite stable classification performance. Using a five-class chest X-ray task, we evaluate DenseNet201, ResNet50V2, and InceptionV3 under a two-stage training protocol and quantify drift with reference-free metrics capturing spatial localization and structural consistency of attribution maps. Across architectures, coarse anatomical localization remains stable, while overlap IoU reveals pronounced architecture-dependent reorganization of evidential structure. Beyond single-method analysis, stability rankings can reverse across LayerCAM and GradCAM++ under converged predictive performance, establishing explanation stability as an interaction between architecture, optimization phase, and attribution objective.

Yu He Ke, Liyuan Jin, Kabilan Elangovan et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are emerging as powerful tools in healthcare, particularly for complex, domain-specific tasks. This study describes the development and evaluation of the PErioperative AI CHatbot (PEACH), a secure LLM-based system integrated with local perioperative guidelines to support preoperative clinical decision-making. PEACH was embedded with 35 institutional perioperative protocols in the secure Claude 3.5 Sonet LLM framework within Pair Chat (developed by Singapore Government) and tested in a silent deployment with real-world data. Accuracy, safety, and usability were assessed. Deviations and hallucinations were categorized based on potential harm, and user feedback was evaluated using the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Updates were made after the initial silent deployment to amend one protocol. In 240 real-world clinical iterations, PEACH achieved a first-generation accuracy of 97.5% (78/80) and an overall accuracy of 96.7% (232/240) across three iterations. The updated PEACH demonstrated improved accuracy of 97.9% (235/240), with a statistically significant difference from the null hypothesis of 95% accuracy (p = 0.018, 95% CI: 0.952-0.991). Minimal hallucinations and deviations were observed (both 1/240 and 2/240, respectively). Clinicians reported that PEACH expedited decisions in 95% of cases, and inter-rater reliability ranged from kappa 0.772-0.893 within PEACH and 0.610-0.784 among attendings. PEACH is an accurate, adaptable tool that enhances consistency and efficiency in perioperative decision-making. Future research should explore its scalability across specialties and its impact on clinical outcomes.