arXiv:2608.30021v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Errors in radiology reports can adversely affect patient treatment, yet automated report quality assurance remains challenging because errors are oft...
By Hermione Warr, Harry Anthony, Lilli J Freischem, Yasin Ibrahim, Daniel R McGowan, Konstantinos Kamnitsas
arXiv:2607. 25589v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Medical-imaging AI benchmarks combine datasets, DICOM rendering, prompts, provider APIs, automated labels, statistical code, manuscripts, and repository releases.
By Mateusz Koz{\l}owski
The study examines how differences in radiologists’ reporting styles—such as terminology, shorthand, formatting, and detail—affect the evaluation of AI-generated chest X‑ray reports. By quantifying the sensitivity of common metrics to these variations, the authors show that changes in reference reports can shift model rankings. They introduce a taxonomy of reporting variations and a rewriting method, ReRef, that preserves clinical meaning while altering style, and release a validated dataset of paired reference reports to aid future research.
By Daniel P. Jeong, Charles Q. Li, Hossein Hosseiny, Nitya M. Bhalla, Fatma Uyar Morency, Pradeep Ravikumar, Zachary C. Lipton, Michael Oberst
arXiv:2609.01470v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: As AI systems are increasingly used to draft radiology reports, reliably evaluating their clinical quality remains a critical challenge. Large language...
By Charles Corbi\`ere, L\'eo Machado, Aubin Charley, Baptiste Callard, Pierre Manceron, Corentin Dancette
arXiv:2609.27607v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: An AI-generated radiology report can resemble a physician's report while omitting an abnormality, adding an unsupported finding, or reversing its pre...
By Jiaju Huang, Hao Yang, Xinyu Ma, Xinglong Liang, Kunyan Cai, Junqiang Ma, Shaobin Chen, Yue Sun, Tao Tan
Med-AR introduces two autoregressive vision‑language models, Med‑AR‑8B and Med‑AR‑2B, pretrained on structured radiology reports, abnormality‑focused text, and region annotations to address long‑tailed chest X‑ray classification. The models outperform existing contrastive, self‑supervised, and supervised encoders—including Med‑CLIP, CheXFound, EVA‑Base, ARK, and BioViL‑T—across PadChest, MIMIC‑CXR, and CheXpert, achieving higher mean AUROC and AUPRC for head, medium, and tail findings and lower excess area under the risk‑coverage curve. Med‑AR also demonstrates improved selective‑prediction performance, with Med‑AR‑8B raising tail‑label mean AUPRC on MIMIC‑CXR from 0.1033 to 0.1441 and Med‑AR‑2B delivering the strongest discrimination on PadChest.
By Janhavi Prabhu, Sahil, Akshay V, Shivam Shukla, Manoj Tadepalli, Preetham Putha