错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Collaboration between clinicians and vision–language models in radiology report generation

  • Ryutaro Tanno,
  • David G. T. Barrett,
  • Andrew Sellergren,
  • Sumedh Ghaisas,
  • Sumanth Dathathri,
  • Abigail See,
  • Johannes Welbl,
  • Charles Lau,
  • Tao Tu,
  • Shekoofeh Azizi,
  • Karan Singhal,
  • Mike Schaekermann,
  • Rhys May,
  • Roy Lee,
  • SiWai Man,
  • Sara Mahdavi,
  • Zahra Ahmed,
  • Yossi Matias,
  • Joelle Barral,
  • S. M. Ali Eslami,
  • Danielle Belgrave,
  • Yun Liu,
  • Sreenivasa Raju Kalidindi,
  • Shravya Shetty,
  • Vivek Natarajan,
  • Pushmeet Kohli,
  • Po-Sen Huang,
  • Alan Karthikesalingam,
  • Ira Ktena

摘要

Automated radiology report generation has the potential to improve patient care and reduce the workload of radiologists. However, the path toward real-world adoption has been stymied by the challenge of evaluating the clinical quality of artificial intelligence (AI)-generated reports. We build a state-of-the-art report generation system for chest radiographs, called Flamingo-CXR, and perform an expert evaluation of AI-generated reports by engaging a panel of board-certified radiologists. We observe a wide distribution of preferences across the panel and across clinical settings, with 56.1% of Flamingo-CXR intensive care reports evaluated to be preferable or equivalent to clinician reports, by half or more of the panel, rising to 77.7% for in/outpatient X-rays overall and to 94% for the subset of cases with no pertinent abnormal findings. Errors were observed in human-written reports and Flamingo-CXR reports, with 24.8% of in/outpatient cases containing clinically significant errors in both report types, 22.8% in Flamingo-CXR reports only and 14.0% in human reports only. For reports that contain errors we develop an assistive setting, a demonstration of clinician–AI collaboration for radiology report composition, indicating new possibilities for potential clinical utility.