medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
Hard to Halt: Automation Bias in Agent-Driven Sequencing Prior Authorization Workflows.
СтатьяПрепринтНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nie Mengshu, Chung Wendy, Waxler Jessica, Lee Michael, Weng Chunhua, Lewis Rachel, Ahimaz Priyanka, Wang Kai, Liu Cong
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Prior authorization (PA) for exome or genome sequencing is a time-consuming process that impedes timely rare disease diagnosis. Large language model-based browser agents offer potential for automating these workflows, but their clinical reliability remain uncharacterized.
METHODS: We developed a sandbox compromising a simulated ES/GS PA submission payer portal and a synthetic EHR containing 836 patient records spanning compliant profiles and deficient profiles with different types of issues. Gemini 3 Pro, Gemini 3 Flash, and Claude Opus 4.5 were evaluated on task completion rate, form completion accuracy, and appropriate withholding for deficient profiles.
RESULTS: Larger models achieved much higher task completion rates (Gemini 3 Pro 95.45%, Claude Opus 4.5 93.67%) compared to Gemini 3 Flash (56.05%), but nearly universally failed to withhold submission for deficient profiles whereas Gemini 3 Flash ironically demonstrated superior withholding performance (17.33%). In a non-agentic setting, Gemini 3 Pro correctly identified 91% of the issues in deficient profiles, indicating that withholding failure is attributable to the browser interaction rather than the model's reasoning limitations.
CONCLUSION: Current LLM-based browser agents exhibit a systematic bias towards form submission that poses risks in PA workflows. A modular, multi-agent architecture with human supervision is necessary for a safe clinical deployment.
METHODS: We developed a sandbox compromising a simulated ES/GS PA submission payer portal and a synthetic EHR containing 836 patient records spanning compliant profiles and deficient profiles with different types of issues. Gemini 3 Pro, Gemini 3 Flash, and Claude Opus 4.5 were evaluated on task completion rate, form completion accuracy, and appropriate withholding for deficient profiles.
RESULTS: Larger models achieved much higher task completion rates (Gemini 3 Pro 95.45%, Claude Opus 4.5 93.67%) compared to Gemini 3 Flash (56.05%), but nearly universally failed to withhold submission for deficient profiles whereas Gemini 3 Flash ironically demonstrated superior withholding performance (17.33%). In a non-agentic setting, Gemini 3 Pro correctly identified 91% of the issues in deficient profiles, indicating that withholding failure is attributable to the browser interaction rather than the model's reasoning limitations.
CONCLUSION: Current LLM-based browser agents exhibit a systematic bias towards form submission that poses risks in PA workflows. A modular, multi-agent architecture with human supervision is necessary for a safe clinical deployment.