Liu, Wei

Abstract Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate strong capabilities in healthcare applications. However, recruiting human evaluators to assess usability and effectiveness becomes challenging in the large-scale LLM-generated outcomes. Existing metrics are often outdated for evaluating LLM-based healthcare technologies. This paper proposes a Research through Evaluation (RtE) approach that can refine metrics and improve assessments of LLM-generated outputs. We deploy RtE in a retrospective comparative study of prostate cancer patient inquiries, comparing responses from human clinical care teams with those generated by a GPT-4-based in-basket bot. Through three rounds of co-evaluations with clinical professionals and an LLM-as-graders study with four LLMs, the RtE method shows that starting with small, iterative evaluations helps human graders adjust metrics to suit their daily practices better. Additionally, in the LLM-as-graders study, LLMs exhibit similar behavior, preferring the in-basket bot's responses over the clinical care team. Our methodology and findings demonstrate that the RtE method can enhance the transparency and robustness of evaluation metrics for LLM-generated content, with the potential to generalize to evaluations in other clinical practices.