A Novel Evaluation Framework for Medical LLMs: Combining Fuzzy Logic and MCDM for Medical Relation and Clinical Concept Extraction
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a crucial element of modern technology, especially in the healthcare sector, which is apparent given the continuous development of large language models (LLMs), which are utilized in various domains, including medical beings. However, when it comes to using these LLMs for the medical domain, there's a need for an evaluation platform to determine their suitability and drive future development efforts. Towards that end, this study aims to address this concern by developing a comprehensive Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) approach that is specifically designed to evaluate medical LLMs. The success of AI, particularly LLMs, in the healthcare domain, depends on their efficacy, safety, and ethical compliance. Therefore, it is essential to have a robust evaluation framework for their integration into medical contexts. This study proposes using the Fuzzy-Weighted Zero-InConsistency (FWZIC) method extended to p, q-quasirung orthopair fuzzy set (p, q-QROFS) for weighing evaluation criteria. This extension enables the handling of uncertainties inherent in medical decision-making processes. The approach accommodates the imprecise and multifaceted nature of real-world medical data and criteria by incorporating fuzzy logic principles. The MultiAtributive Ideal-Real Comparative Analysis (MAIRCA) method is employed for the assessment of medical LLMs utilized in the case study of this research. The results of this research revealed that "Medical Re…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
MCDM-based applications have not been applied with a primary focus on systematically assessing the trustworthiness of LLMs.
“However, they have not been applied with a primary focus on systematically assessing the trustworthiness of LLMs.”
From Trustworthiness Evaluation of Large Language Models Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making (2025) · cites this paper as [32]
Cites
Yang, X., Bian, J., Fang, R., Bjarnadottir, R. I., Hogan, W. R., & Wu, Y. (2020) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1093/jamia/ocz144 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Trustworthiness Evaluation of Large Language Models Using Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Aksoy, M., Adem, A., & Dağdeviren, M. (2025) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3612568 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“On the other hand, MCDM-based applications [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39] demonstrate that these methods can effectively support structured evaluations and even guide LLM selection in specific contexts.”
- Authors
- Alamoodi, A. H., Zughoul, O., David, D., Garfan, S., Pamucar, D., Albahri, O. S., Albahri, A. S., Yussof, S., & Sharaf, I. M.
- Affiliations
- Applied Science Private University (JO)
- Ahmed Bin Mohammed Military College (QA)
- Sultan Idris Education University (MY)
- Western Caspian University (AZ)
- Universiti Tenaga Nasional (MY)
- Higher Technological Institute (EG)
- Corresponding author
- Alamoodi, A. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Systems
- Published
- 2024-08-31
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-81
- ISSN
- 0148-5598 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-689X
- OpenAlex
- W4402096066
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 6.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Medical Systems (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Fuzzy and Soft Set Theory
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
- Keywords
- medical large language models, LLM evaluation framework, fuzzy multi-criteria decision making, MAIRCA, clinical concept extraction, healthcare AI adoption
- MeSH terms
- Artificial Intelligence, Decision Making, Humans, Fuzzy Logic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review