A reproducible manipulation pipeline is developed that takes publicly available seed medical note templates and uses commercial LLMs to produce customized manipulated notes by substituting patient names, provider identities, dates, and medical conditions across multiple model families, input formats, and prompt phrasings.
Abstract
The rapid deployment of large language models (LLMs) in healthcare settings makes the reliability of their built-in guardrails against malicious queries a question of urgent practical consequence. Yet the robustness of these mechanisms against deliberate misuse (in the healthcare context) remains poorly understood. In this paper, we investigate this question empirically, using AI-assisted medical note manipulation as a concrete case study. We make four novel contributions. First, we develop a reproducible manipulation pipeline that takes publicly available seed medical note templates and use commercial LLMs to produce customized manipulated notes by substituting patient names, provider identities, dates, and medical conditions across multiple model families, input formats, and prompt phrasings. Second, we conduct a systematic empirical evaluation of LLM guardrail robustness for medical note manipulation. Our experimental results reveal substantial weaknesses and inconsistencies in contemporary commercial LLM guardrails, including low refusal rates for several model families. Third, we utilize a combination of automated metrics and human annotation-based metrics to assess the correctness of requested manipulations. Fourth, we conduct a user-study to assess the believability of manipulated medical notes, finding that the best manipulations are visually indistinguishable from original documents to human raters. Finally, we discuss implications for responsible guardrail design in LLMs, AI safety policies, and the broader ethics of deploying LLMs in healthcare settings.
A Multi-Agent Clinical Curation Framework that filters raw data noise and validates clinical integrity against evidence-based medical principles and develops an Automated Rubric-based Evaluation Framework that decomposes physician responses into granular, case-specific criteria, achieving substantially stronger alignme...
Zhiling Yan, D. Song, Zhen Fang et al.· Proceedings of the 32nd ACM...· 10 citations· ⚡2
SAFE–AI (Structured and Automated Framework for Explainable AI), a novel method for clinical decision making that combines the strengths of clinical expert knowledge with LLMs in an ontology–driven model that minimizes hallucinations using strict rules, is presented.
Diego Trujillo, Du-Lin Wang, Nathan Bahr et al.· PLOS Digital Health· 0 citations
A thorough review of the developments in LLM technologies, their uses in clinical and administrative settings, as well as their ethical considerations are reviewed to suggest a conceptual structure for responsible implementation that will ensure both technological innovation and patient safety, as well as regulatory co...
Noah Wright· International Journal of Mod...· 0 citations
Longitudinal electronic health records (EHRs) capture years of patient history across notes, codes, labs, and procedures, and contain evidence needed to reason about likely clinical outcomes. However, comprehensive clinician review of these records is impractical, and LLM-based processing is costly and often unreliable...
Feng-Nan Li, Heman Burre, Li-Wen Sun et al.· 0 citations
The Review examines rapid LLM adoption in clinical care, outlining emerging security and safety risks across development stages, key protective layers, clinically relevant threats and current mitigation responsibilities in a single integrated framework.
J. Clusmann, O. Freyer, Max Ostermann et al.· Nature· 1 citation
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.