Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
GPT-4V's purported strong multimodal abilities raise interests in using it to automate radiology report writing, but there lacks thorough evaluations. In this work, we perform a systematic evaluation of GPT-4V in generating radiology reports on two chest X-ray report datasets: MIMIC-CXR and IU X-Ray. We attempt to directly generate reports using GPT-4V through different prompting strategies and find that it fails terribly in both lexical metrics and clinical efficacy metrics. To understand the low performance, we decompose the task into two steps: 1) the medical image reasoning step of predicting medical condition labels from images; and 2) the report synthesis step of generating reports from (groundtruth) conditions. We show that GPT-4V's performance in image reasoning is consistently low across different prompts. In fact, the distributions of model-predicted labels remain constant regardless of which groundtruth conditions are present on the image, suggesting that the model is not interpreting chest X-rays meaningfully. Even when given groundtruth conditions in report synthesis, its generated reports are less correct and less natural-sounding than a finetuned LLaMA-2. Altogether, our findings cast doubt on the viability of using GPT-4V in a radiology workflow.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Yuyang Jiang
Harbin University of Science and Technology
Chacha Chen
Pennsylvania State University
Dang Nguyen
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jiang et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68e60240b6db643587595bc1 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2407.12176