Role-Prompting in Frontier Large Language Models Influences Clinical Reasoning in Complex Medical Cases
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in healthcare, where they may adopt different stakeholder perspectives, yet the effect of role-prompting on clinical ethical reasoning remains poorly characterized.
Methods
We evaluated three frontier LLMs: Claude Opus 4.6, GPT-5.4, and Gemini 3.1 Pro across 25 ethically complex medical cases. Each model responded from three stakeholder perspectives (physician, patient, insurer) across three independent runs (675 total responses). Decisions were benchmarked against a six-physician panel. Ethical value prioritization was analyzed from physician- and LLM-provided ranked values. A Patient-Centric Decision Index (PCDI) was developed to quantify LLM decision alignment with patient-preferred outcomes.
Results
Among 20 cases with clear physician consensus, LLMs prompted as an insurer reduced alignment with physician majority by 50% for GPT-5.4 (p = 0.004), 45% for Gemini 3.1 Pro (p = 0.008) and 10.5% (NS) for Opus 4.6. The insurer role shifted primary ethical values from beneficence (27%) to financial stewardship (20%) across all LLMs.
Conclusions
Stakeholder role-prompting fundamentally alters clinical decisions and ethical value frameworks of frontier LLMs, with the insurer role producing systematic denial of physician-endorsed, patient-preferred treatments. These findings raise the need for standardized LLM patient-centricity benchmarks, and physician oversight when LLMs are deployed in clinical decision-making.
