PreprintCited by 18Multimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationMachine Learning in Healthcare

Controllable Chest X-Ray Report Generation from Longitudinal Representations

Open access
Serra, Francesco Dalla, Wang, Chaoyang, Deligianni, Fani, Dalton, Jeffrey, O'Neil, Alison Q·2023·arXiv

Abstract

Radiology reports are detailed text descriptions of the content of medical scans. Each report describes the presence/absence and location of relevant clinical findings, commonly including comparison with prior exams of the same patient to describe how they evolved. Radiology reporting is a time-consuming process, and scan results are often subject to delays. One strategy to speed up reporting is to integrate automated reporting systems, however clinical deployment requires high accuracy and interpretability. Previous approaches to automated radiology reporting generally do not provide the prior study as input, precluding comparison which is required for clinical accuracy in some types of scans, and offer only unreliable methods of interpretability. Therefore, leveraging an existing visual input format of anatomical tokens, we introduce two novel aspects: (1) longitudinal representation learning -- we input the prior scan as an additional input, proposing a method to align, concatenate and fuse the current and prior visual information into a joint longitudinal representation which can be provided to the multimodal report generation model; (2) sentence-anatomy dropout -- a training strategy for controllability in which the report generator model is trained to predict only sentences from the original report which correspond to the subset of anatomical regions given as input. We show through in-depth experiments on the MIMIC-CXR dataset how the proposed approach achieves state-of-the-art results while enabling anatomy-wise controllable report generation.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2310.05881

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The paper's qualitative evaluation approach differs from most existing works that primarily ask experts to rate overall report quality via a Likert scale, provide total error counts/categorisation, or engage in comparison rankings.

    “By inviting a domain expert to review and adapt individual phrase outputs, our approach to qualitative evaluation of report generation differs from most existing works that primarily ask experts to rate overall report quality via a (Likert-) scale; 59 provide total error counts/ categorisation; 48,60 or engage in comparison rankings across different report candidates.61”

    From MAIRA-2: Grounded Radiology Report Generation (2024) · cites this paper as [60]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • MAIRA-2: Grounded Radiology Report Generation

    Bannur, S., Bouzid, K., Castro, D. C., Schwaighofer, A., Thieme, A., Bond-Taylor, S., Ilse, M., Pérez-García, F., Salvatelli, V., Sharma, H., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.04449 · Cited by 19 · see citing works

    “…reports from radiology images has become subject to increasing research interest (Sloan et al., 2024; Zhou et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2024; Tu et al., 2024; Hyland et al., 2023; Jeong et al., 2023; Tanida et al., 2023; Chen et al., 2024; Müller et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023).”
    Background

Authors
Serra, F. D., Wang, C., Deligianni, F., Dalton, J., & O'Neil, A. Q.
Affiliations
  • Canon Medical Research Europe (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
Corresponding author
Serra, Francesco Dalla
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Pages
4891-4904
OpenAlex
W4389518840
Cited by
18
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6
FWCI
1.93
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning in Healthcare
Keywords
automated radiology report generation, chest radiography, controllable text generation, MIMIC-CXR

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review