Better Eyes, Better Thoughts: Why Vision Chain-of-Thought Fails in Medicine

Large vision-language models (VLMs) often benefit from chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting in general domains, yet its efficacy in medical vision-language tasks remains underexplored. We report a counter-intuitive trend: on medical visual question answering, CoT frequently underperforms direct answering (DirA) across general-purpose and medical-specific models. We attribute this to a \emph{medical perception bottleneck}: subtle, domain-specific cues can weaken visual grounding, and CoT may compound early perceptual uncertainty rather than correct it. To probe this hypothesis, we introduce two training-free, inference-time grounding interventions: (i) \emph{perception anchoring} via region-of-interest cues and (ii) \emph{description grounding} via high-quality textual guidance. Across multiple benchmarks and model families, these interventions improve accuracy, mitigate CoT degradation, and in several settings reverse the CoT–DirA inversion. Our findings suggest that reliable clinical VLMs require robust visual grounding and cross-modal alignment, beyond extending text-driven reasoning chains. Code is available \href{https://github.com/TianYin123/Better_Eyes_Better_Thoughts}{here}.