Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the observability of patient states and conversational phase structures in clinical encounters by analyzing 439 transcripts paired with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The researchers utilized a PHI-compliant GPT-5 for transcript annotation and conducted extensive manual validation to ensure the reliability of their findings. The key result reveals an observability asymmetry: while conversational phase structures are effectively observable and informative, patient states remain only partially observable, highlighting the limitations of relying solely on conversational data for inferring human states.
Conversational phase structures can be reliably observed in clinical encounters, but patient states are only partially recoverable, challenging assumptions about transcript-based inference.
Many modern AI systems analyze conversational traces to infer aspects of human interaction and state, implicitly assuming that such information is recoverable from conversation. We study observability: whether a target is recoverable from conversational transcripts alone. Observability is difficult to assess because transcripts may provide only a partial view of many targets, and large-scale analysis requires model-based annotation, making true limits of the conversational signal hard to distinguish from annotator error. We therefore study clinical encounters, where patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide an external anchor for patient state, and visits follow broadly structured patterns. We study observability of patient state and conversational phase structure using 439 real-world clinical encounter transcripts spanning 134 hours, including 245 ENT transcripts paired with 273 PROM surveys. We operationalize patient state using PROM scores for voice, cough, and swallowing; phase structure using conversational phase segmentation. To make these analyses credible at scale, we use a PHI-compliant GPT-5 deployment for transcript annotation and conduct 40 hours of manual validation, reducing the risk that apparent limits of observability simply reflect annotator error. Our core finding is an observability asymmetry: phase structure is observable and useful for characterizing clinical encounter organization, while patient state is only partially observable, even in a setting designed to elicit patient symptoms and experiences, cautioning against transcript-only inference of human state.