Contextualizing Clinical Benchmarks: A Tripartite Approach to Evaluating LLM-Based Tools in Mental Health Settings

Abstract

The rapid proliferation of Large Language Model (LLM)-based tools in mental health care presents an urgent need for clinical evaluation frameworks. With millions already engaging with Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, mental health disciplines require immediate, practical evaluation approaches rather than awaiting idealized methodologies. This paper introduces a practical, implementable approach to evaluating LLM-based tools in mental health settings through both theoretical analysis and actionable assessment methods. We propose a tripartite evaluation framework comprising: (1) the technical profile layer, which assesses foundational model safety and infrastructure compliance; (2) the health care knowledge layer, which validates domain-specific clinical knowledge and safety boundaries; and (3) the clinical reasoning layer, which evaluates decision-making capabilities and reasoning processes. Each proposed layer includes concrete evaluation methods that clinical teams can implement immediately, from direct model questioning to adversarial testing approaches. As health care organizations conduct and share evaluations using this approach, the field can collectively develop the specialized benchmarks and reasoning assessments essential for ensuring LLM integrations enhance rather than compromise patient care in the mental health space. The framework serves both as an immediate practical guide and a foundation for building more sophisticated evaluation resources tailored to mental health contexts.

Ähnliche Arbeiten