SIMAX: A Scalable and Interpretable Framework for Multi-Fidelity and Annotated Clinician-Patient Dialogue Simulation

📅 2026-06-29
📈 Citations: 0
Influential: 0
📄 PDF
🤖 AI Summary
This work addresses the high annotation cost and poor inter-annotator consistency in clinical physician–patient dialogue datasets, which hinder the evaluation of AI-based communication coding systems. To overcome these limitations, the authors propose a controllable generation framework for simulating clinician–patient dialogues with embedded behavioral annotations. The framework leverages predefined clinical scenarios, role-specific characteristics, and target communication behaviors, guided by dual codebooks—Global and WISER—and integrates speech synthesis with automatic audio quality assessment metrics (UTMOS, WV-MOS, WER, CER) and CLAP-based text–audio alignment. This approach enables, for the first time, multi-fidelity, interpretable, and reproducible clinical dialogue simulation. The system generates 3,388 cross-specialty dialogues, which automatic and human evaluations confirm exhibit high naturalness, transcription accuracy, and clinical authenticity, while also exposing limited sensitivity of existing coding systems along certain behavioral dimensions.
📝 Abstract
Background. The widespread deployment of ambient digital scribes is driving large-scale capture of clinician-patient dialogues. Human coding of clinical communication data remains costly, inconsistent, and difficult to scale, motivating AI-driven communication coding systems. However, evaluating these systems requires real-world dialogues and human-coded labels, both hard to obtain at scale. Methods. We developed SIMAX (Scalable and Interpretable Framework for Multi-Fidelity and Annotated Clinician-Patient Dialogue Simulation), a framework for generating controlled clinical dialogue data with reference behavioral annotations. SIMAX generates clinician-patient dialogues from predefined clinical scenarios, personas and voice conditions, and target communication behaviors. Behaviors are controlled using two codebooks: the Global Codebook for overall communication quality and the WISER Codebook for specific countable behaviors. We evaluated SIMAX using automated and human quality assessments and an example communication coding system. Results. SIMAX generated 3,388 simulated dialogues across three specialties, multiple visit stages, persona characteristics, and accent conditions. Automated assessment showed mean UTMOS and WV-MOS scores of 3.03 and 2.61, WER and CER of 0.07 and 0.05, and CLAP cosine similarity of 0.41, suggesting reasonable speech naturalness, high transcription fidelity, and positive text-audio correspondence. Human evaluation showed a median MOS of 4.67 and a median clinical realism score of 3.00. Downstream evaluation suggests that SIMAX can assess how a communication coding system responds to behavioral targets and reveal insufficient sensitivity in some dimensions. Conclusions. SIMAX generates controlled and reproducible simulated clinician-patient dialogues, providing a data foundation for developing, validating, and refining communication coding systems.
Problem

Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.

clinical dialogue simulation
communication coding
multi-fidelity data
behavioral annotation
scalable evaluation
Innovation

Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.

multi-fidelity simulation
interpretable dialogue generation
behavioral codebooks
clinician-patient communication
scalable synthetic data
🔎 Similar Papers
No similar papers found.
Z
Zhuhan Bao
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
Rui Yang
Rui Yang
Duke-NUS Medical School
Medical InformaticsMedical Text MiningMedical Knowledge Graph
Bohao Yang
Bohao Yang
University of Manchester
NLPDialogue GenerationDialogue EvaluationTable UnderstandingLLMs
Z
Zhiyi Liu
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
S
Sicheng Shu
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
R
Ruio Heerschap
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
Le Li
Le Li
Cornell University
Machine learningQuantitative researchStatistical modelingBioinformaticsDeep Learning
D
Doris Yang
Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
E
Elisabeth Bond
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
Haoyuan Wang
Haoyuan Wang
University of Pennsylvania, Applied Mathematics and Computational Science
Biostatistics
N
Nicoleta Economou-Zavlanos
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
J
Joshua M. Biro
Medstar Health National Center for Human Factors in Healthcare, Washington, DC, USA
M
Matthew McDermott
Department of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
N
Nan Liu
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; Duke-NUS AI + Medical Sciences Initiative, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore; Centre for Biomedical Data Science, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore; Pre-hospital and Emergency Research Centre, Health Services Research and Population Health, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore; NUS Artificial Intelligence Institute, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
A
Anand Chowdhury
Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
K
Kai Sun
Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA
Kathryn Pollak
Kathryn Pollak
Professor, Population Health Sciences, Duke University
E
Ed Hammond
Duke Center for Health Informatics, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
C
Chuan Hong
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA