Clinical Summarization inference

Design the workflow before choosing a model

Preserve provenance for extracted facts and make the original record accessible. Define the intended review workflow, permitted data handling, and responsibility for accepting a summary before selecting a model.

Define a representative input and an explicit acceptance criterion. Keep model and prompt versions with the result so quality changes can be investigated.

Evaluate outcomes and failure modes

Measure factual fidelity, omitted critical information, source attribution, and reviewer correction time.

Use an appropriately governed evaluation set and qualified reviewers. Track additions, omissions, and contradictions separately; general language benchmarks cannot establish suitability for this workflow.

Compare candidate routes on the same held-out examples. Report how many examples were evaluated and inspect failures rather than relying on a single average score.

Roll out with a measurable cost baseline

Begin with supervised evaluation under the organization’s existing clinical and information-governance processes. Model routing cannot substitute for those approvals.

Calculate cost per accepted outcome using input and output tokens, retrieval or tool fees, retries, and review effort. A lower token price is useful only if the total workflow still meets its requirements.

o10 can provide model routing for the inference steps. Your application remains responsible for workflow permissions, tool behavior, and deciding whether the final result is acceptable.