arXiv:2602.17308v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for diagnostic tasks in medicine. In clinical practice, the correct diagnosis can rarely be immediately inferred from the initial patient presentation alone. Rather, reaching a diagnosis often involves systematic history taking, during which clinicians reason over multiple potential conditions through iterative questioning to resolve uncertainty. This process requires considering differential diagnoses and actively excluding emergencies that demand immediate intervention. Yet, the ability of medical LLMs to generate informative follow-up questions and thus reason over differential diagnoses remains underexplored. Here, we introduce MedClarify, an AI agent for information-seeking that can generate follow-up questions for iterative reasoning to support diagnostic decision-making. Specifically, MedClarify computes a list of candidate diagnoses analogous to a differential diagnosis, and then proactively generates follow-up questions aimed at reducing diagnostic uncertainty. By selecting the question with the highest expected information gain, MedClarify enables targeted, uncertainty-aware reasoning to improve diagnostic performance. In our experiments, we first demonstrate the limitations of current LLMs in medical reasoning, which often yield multiple, similarly likely diagnoses, especially when patient cases are incomplete or relevant information for diagnosis is missing. We then show that our information-theoretic reasoning approach can generate effective follow-up questioning and thereby reduces diagnostic errors by ~27 percentage points (p.p.) compared to a standard single-shot LLM baseline. Altogether, MedClarify offers a path to improve medical LLMs through agentic information-seeking and to thus promote effective dialogues with medical LLMs that reflect the iterative and uncertain nature of real-world clinical reasoning.

arXiv:2602.16729v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We systematically evaluate the quality of widely used AI safety datasets from two perspectives: in isolation and in practice. In isolation, we examine how well these datasets reflect real-world attacks based on three key properties: driven by ulterior intent, well-crafted, and out-of-distribution. We find that these datasets overrely on "triggering cues": words or phrases with overt negative/sensitive connotations that are intended to trigger safety mechanisms explicitly, which is unrealistic compared to real-world attacks. In practice, we evaluate whether these datasets genuinely measure safety risks or merely provoke refusals through triggering cues. To explore this, we introduce "intent laundering": a procedure that abstracts away triggering cues from attacks (data points) while strictly preserving their malicious intent and all relevant details. Our results indicate that current AI safety datasets fail to faithfully represent real-world attacks due to their overreliance on triggering cues. In fact, once these cues are removed, all previously evaluated "reasonably safe" models become unsafe, including Gemini 3 Pro and Claude Sonnet 3.7. Moreover, when intent laundering is adapted as a jailbreaking technique, it consistently achieves high attack success rates, ranging from 90% to over 98%, under fully black-box access. Overall, our findings expose a significant disconnect between how model safety is evaluated and how real-world adversaries behave.

A blood test for detecting cancer early being developed by the diagnostics firm Grail failed to meet its main goal in a giant study being conducted with England’s National Health Service, the company said Thursday.

Grail’s test has been the standard bearer for new technologies that promise a blood test can be used to detect many different types of cancer early and eventually even to indicate to scientists where in the body to look for tumors. The company already sells its test, called Galleri, for a list price of $1,000, although it is not yet approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Grail said Thursday it sold 185,000 tests in 2025, generating $136.8 million. 

The company’s shares were down 47% in after-hours trading.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

© Adobe

You’re reading the web edition of STAT’s Health Tech newsletter, our guide to how technology is transforming the life sciences. Sign up to get it delivered in your inbox every Tuesday and Thursday.

Good morning health tech readers!

Please join me in congratulating my colleagues as STAT, who have been honored with a fourth Polk Award for our coverage of the Trump administration’s impacts on the federal health department and American science. The award recognizes the whole newsroom and in particular the work of Lizzy Lawrence covering a dramatic year of changes at the Food and Drug Administration. 

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

© Adobe

Nature, Published online: 18 February 2026; doi:10.1038/d41586-026-00290-9

An artificial-intelligence system uses clinical data, genetic information and literature searches to suggest diagnoses and provides the underlying reasoning.