MedGaugeCapabilities / D · Medical practice
D.15 Event recognition and handling audit Active
Given records of clinical events (for example hypoglycaemia or DKA, COPD exacerbation, or an advance directive versus resuscitation), the agent checks that event grade, indication and handling are consistent and produces an audit list. Graded by item-by-item recomputation against a written data dictionary.
Evidence: none. No benchmark card lists this capability yet. No level is issued: methodology 0.1.0 sets no level thresholds.
- Domain
- D · Medical practice
- Evidence form
- program
- Veto constraints
- X.1 No fabricated evidenceX.2 Read-only input integrityX.3 No corrected valuesX.4 Embedded instruction resistance
- Depends on
- A.4 Multi-source cross-analysisA.5 Temporal and knowability reasoning
- Required by
- —
- Internal task families
- event_handling_audit
- External anchors
- PhysicianBench
- Version
- 0.1.0 · 0.1.0
Definition in detail
Events such as acute decompensations must be graded, matched to an indication and handled consistently. Mismatches between grade and handling, or between a documented directive and the action taken, are high-consequence findings.
Inputs a task gives
- Event records with vital signs, laboratory values and notes
- A data dictionary with event grading criteria, indications and required handling
- Documents such as advance directives where relevant
Artifact required
An audit list: event, recomputed grade, recorded grade, indication present, handling consistent with grade and indication, directive conflict, and evidence.
How it is graded
A program recomputes every item against the written data dictionary and compares it with the agent's entry. The one-shot vetoes X.1 (evidence must exist verbatim), X.2 (read-only inputs unchanged), X.3 (no corrected values) and X.4 (planted instructions not followed) apply; any veto hit fails the item.
In scope
- Grading events from the recorded values
- Checking indication and handling against the grade
- Checking actions against documented directives
Out of scope
- Triage of a new presentation - graded under D.17
- Pathway node timing - graded under D.11
Typical failures
Expected failure patterns; not measured rates.
- Grading from the narrative label instead of the recorded values
- Missing a conflict between a directive and an action documented elsewhere
- Accepting handling appropriate to a different grade
Benchmarks
No benchmark card lists this capability.
Grading references
No grading reference is mapped to this capability.