FineRadScore: A Radiology Report Line-by-Line Evaluation Technique Generating Corrections with Severity Scores
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper presents a novel technique called FineRadScore for evaluating radiology reports line-by-line and generating severity scores for any identified errors or issues.
- The approach aims to provide a more granular and nuanced evaluation of radiology report quality compared to previous methods.
- FineRadScore can be used to assess reports generated by language models or human radiologists, and provides specific feedback on areas for improvement.
Plain English Explanation
FineRadScore is a new tool for evaluating radiology reports in a detailed, line-by-line manner. Radiology reports are written summaries that describe the findings from medical imaging scans like X-rays or MRIs.
The key innovation of FineRadScore is that it can identify any errors or issues in a report and assign a severity score to each one. This allows for more granular and nuanced feedback compared to previous evaluation methods that just gave an overall quality score.
FineRadScore can be used to assess reports written by both human radiologists and language models that are trained to generate radiology reports automatically. The detailed feedback it provides can help improve the quality of these reports, whether they are produced by machines or humans.
Technical Explanation
The FineRadScore technique involves several key steps:
-
Line-by-Line Annotation: The radiology report is broken down and annotated line-by-line by expert radiologists. Any errors, omissions, or other issues are identified in each line.
-
Severity Scoring: For each issue identified, the radiologists assign a severity score based on factors like the potential clinical impact and difficulty of correction. This creates a granular profile of the report's quality.
-
Feedback Generation: The severity scores and associated corrections are compiled into a report that provides detailed, actionable feedback. This can be used to improve reports generated by language models or human radiologists.
The authors tested FineRadScore on a dataset of radiology reports, including some generated by language models. The results showed that FineRadScore was able to identify more issues and provide more nuanced feedback compared to previous evaluation approaches like MRSCOR or GREBE.
Critical Analysis
The FineRadScore approach has several strengths, including its ability to provide granular, actionable feedback on report quality. This level of detail could be valuable for improving both human-written and machine-generated radiology reports.
However, the reliance on expert radiologists to manually annotate and score each report line may limit the scalability of the approach. Automated techniques for identifying and evaluating report issues could help address this.
Additionally, the authors only tested FineRadScore on a limited dataset. More extensive evaluation across diverse report types and settings would be needed to fully assess its generalizability and robustness.
Conclusion
The FineRadScore technique represents a novel approach to evaluating the quality of radiology reports in a granular, line-by-line manner. By identifying specific issues and assigning severity scores, it provides more detailed and actionable feedback compared to previous methods.
While the reliance on manual expert annotation may limit scalability, the insights from FineRadScore could be valuable for improving both human-generated and machine-generated radiology reports. Further research and refinement of the approach could lead to significant advancements in radiology report quality assurance.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
FineRadScore: A Radiology Report Line-by-Line Evaluation Technique Generating Corrections with Severity Scores
Alyssa Huang, Oishi Banerjee, Kay Wu, Eduardo Pontes Reis, Pranav Rajpurkar
The current gold standard for evaluating generated chest x-ray (CXR) reports is through radiologist annotations. However, this process can be extremely time-consuming and costly, especially when evaluating large numbers of reports. In this work, we present FineRadScore, a Large Language Model (LLM)-based automated evaluation metric for generated CXR reports. Given a candidate report and a ground-truth report, FineRadScore gives the minimum number of line-by-line corrections required to go from the candidate to the ground-truth report. Additionally, FineRadScore provides an error severity rating with each correction and generates comments explaining why the correction was needed. We demonstrate that FineRadScore's corrections and error severity scores align with radiologist opinions. We also show that, when used to judge the quality of the report as a whole, FineRadScore aligns with radiologists as well as current state-of-the-art automated CXR evaluation metrics. Finally, we analyze FineRadScore's shortcomings to provide suggestions for future improvements.
Read more8/13/2024
📊
0
Longitudinal Data and a Semantic Similarity Reward for Chest X-Ray Report Generation
Aaron Nicolson, Jason Dowling, Bevan Koopman
Radiologists face high burnout rates, partially due to the increasing volume of Chest X-rays (CXRs) requiring interpretation and reporting. Automated CXR report generation holds promise for reducing this burden and improving patient care. While current models show potential, their diagnostic accuracy is limited. Our proposed CXR report generator integrates elements of the radiologist workflow and introduces a novel reward for reinforcement learning. Our approach leverages longitudinal data from a patient's prior CXR study and effectively handles cases where no prior study exist, thus mirroring the radiologist's workflow. In contrast, existing models typically lack this flexibility, often requiring prior studies for the model to function optimally. Our approach also incorporates all CXRs from a patient's study and distinguishes between report sections through section embeddings. Our reward for reinforcement learning leverages CXR-BERT, which forces our model to learn the clinical semantics of radiology reporting. We conduct experiments on publicly available datasets -- MIMIC-CXR and Open-i IU X-ray -- with metrics shown to more closely correlate with radiologists' assessment of reporting. Results from our study demonstrate that the proposed model generates reports that are more aligned with radiologists' reports than state-of-the-art models, such as those utilising large language models, reinforcement learning, and multi-task learning. The proposed model improves the diagnostic accuracy of CXR report generation, which could one day reduce radiologists' workload and enhance patient care. Our Hugging Face checkpoint (https://huggingface.co/aehrc/cxrmate) and code (https://github.com/aehrc/cxrmate) are publicly available.
Read more6/21/2024
📉
0
GREEN: Generative Radiology Report Evaluation and Error Notation
Sophie Ostmeier, Justin Xu, Zhihong Chen, Maya Varma, Louis Blankemeier, Christian Bluethgen, Arne Edward Michalson, Michael Moseley, Curtis Langlotz, Akshay S Chaudhari, Jean-Benoit Delbrouck
Evaluating radiology reports is a challenging problem as factual correctness is extremely important due to the need for accurate medical communication about medical images. Existing automatic evaluation metrics either suffer from failing to consider factual correctness (e.g., BLEU and ROUGE) or are limited in their interpretability (e.g., F1CheXpert and F1RadGraph). In this paper, we introduce GREEN (Generative Radiology Report Evaluation and Error Notation), a radiology report generation metric that leverages the natural language understanding of language models to identify and explain clinically significant errors in candidate reports, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Compared to current metrics, GREEN offers: 1) a score aligned with expert preferences, 2) human interpretable explanations of clinically significant errors, enabling feedback loops with end-users, and 3) a lightweight open-source method that reaches the performance of commercial counterparts. We validate our GREEN metric by comparing it to GPT-4, as well as to error counts of 6 experts and preferences of 2 experts. Our method demonstrates not only higher correlation with expert error counts, but simultaneously higher alignment with expert preferences when compared to previous approaches.
Read more5/7/2024
0
MRScore: Evaluating Radiology Report Generation with LLM-based Reward System
Yunyi Liu, Zhanyu Wang, Yingshu Li, Xinyu Liang, Lingqiao Liu, Lei Wang, Luping Zhou
In recent years, automated radiology report generation has experienced significant growth. This paper introduces MRScore, an automatic evaluation metric tailored for radiology report generation by leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs). Conventional NLG (natural language generation) metrics like BLEU are inadequate for accurately assessing the generated radiology reports, as systematically demonstrated by our observations within this paper. To address this challenge, we collaborated with radiologists to develop a framework that guides LLMs for radiology report evaluation, ensuring alignment with human analysis. Our framework includes two key components: i) utilizing GPT to generate large amounts of training data, i.e., reports with different qualities, and ii) pairing GPT-generated reports as accepted and rejected samples and training LLMs to produce MRScore as the model reward. Our experiments demonstrate MRScore's higher correlation with human judgments and superior performance in model selection compared to traditional metrics. Our code and datasets will be available on GitHub.
Read more4/30/2024