← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.2123 · 记录 #1
LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for Clinical Workflows: A Survey of AI Hospitals
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:46
摘要
This survey reviews LLM-based multi-agent systems for clinical and healthcare workflows, including diagnosis, triage, consultation, discharge, mental health, and EHR-linked decision support. We define AI hospitals as workflow-level clinical systems in which agents take explicit roles, hand off shared state, use EHR- or guideline-grounded tools, and operate with safety gates and audit-ready logs. We argue that these systems should be compared at the workflow level, rather than only by model components or end-task accuracy, because clinical action, evidence, and accountability are expressed through state transitions and handoffs. We organize the literature through a workflow-level taxonomy covering roles and handoffs, memory and evidence, tools, and reasoning, control, and escalation. We further synthesize major workflow settings and task families, introduce a four-layer evaluation stack spanning safety, process, outcome, and operations, and connect model capabilities to workflow observables relevant to deployment. Finally, we present Integration Readiness Levels (IRL1-IRL6), task-level instrumentation requirements, and recurring workflow failure modes as a practical framework for comparing, evaluating, and deploying clinical LLM agents and AI hospitals.
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for Clinical Workflows: A Survey of AI Hospitals
This survey reviews LLM-based multi-agent systems for clinical and healthcare workflows, including diagnosis, triage, consultation, discharge, mental health, and EHR-linked decision support. We define AI hospitals as workflow-level clinical systems in which agents take explicit roles, hand off shared state, use EHR- or guideline-grounded tools, and operate with safety gates and audit-ready logs. We argue that these systems should be compared at the workflow level, rather than only by model components or end-task accuracy, because clinical action, evidence, and accountability are expressed through state transitions and handoffs. We organize the literature through a workflow-level taxonomy covering roles and handoffs, memory and evidence, tools, and reasoning, control, and escalation. We further synthesize major workflow settings and task families, introduce a four-layer evaluation stack spanning safety, process, outcome, and operations, and connect model capabilities to workflow observables relevant to deployment. Finally, we present Integration Readiness Levels (IRL1-IRL6), task-level instrumentation requirements, and recurring workflow failure modes as a practical framework for comparing, evaluating, and deploying clinical LLM agents and AI hospitals.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗