医学视觉问答难落地临床,因缺病史、多视角支持与真实需求错配。
Barriers in Integrating Medical Visual Question Answering into Radiology Workflows: A Scoping Review and Clinicians' Insights
- 综合68篇论文与50名医生调研,揭示当前系统多为非诊断性问答
- 超60%问答对无临床意义,多数模型不支持多视角或多分辨率图像
- 医生普遍要求对话式交互、特定解剖区域聚焦及患者病史整合
医学视觉问答(MedVQA)有望通过问答形式自动化医学影像解读,辅助放射科医生。尽管模型与数据集不断进步,其在临床工作流中的应用仍有限。本研究系统回顾2018至2024年的68篇文献,并对来自印度和泰国的50名临床医生进行调研,分析MedVQA的实际效用、挑战与差距。遵循Arksey与O'Malley的范围综述框架,采用双轨方法:(1) 文献审查以识别放射科工作流程中的关键概念、进展与研究空白;(2) 医生调研以获取其对MedVQA临床相关性的看法。结果显示,近60%的问答对不具备诊断价值且缺乏临床意义。多数数据集与模型无法支持多视角、多分辨率成像、电子病历(EHR)集成或领域知识,而这些正是临床诊断所必需的。此外,现有评估指标与临床需求存在明显脱节。医生调查显示,仅29.8%认为当前系统高度有用。主要担忧包括缺少患者病史或领域知识(87.2%)、更倾向手动标注数据集(51.1%),以及对多视角图像支持的需求(78.7%)。另有66%医生偏好针对特定解剖区域的模型,89.4%倾向于基于对话的交互系统。尽管潜力巨大,但受限于多模态分析能力不足、患者上下文缺失及评估方式与临床需求错位,需解决这些挑战才能实现有效临床整合。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Medical Visual Question Answering (MedVQA) is a promising tool to assist radiologists by automating medical image interpretation through question answering. Despite advances in models and datasets, MedVQA's integration into clinical workflows remains limited. This study systematically reviews 68 publications (2018-2024) and surveys 50 clinicians from India and Thailand to examine MedVQA's practical utility, challenges, and gaps. Following the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework, we used a two-pronged approach: (1) reviewing studies to identify key concepts, advancements, and research gaps in radiology workflows, and (2) surveying clinicians to capture their perspectives on MedVQA's clinical relevance. Our review reveals that nearly 60% of QA pairs are non-diagnostic and lack clinical relevance. Most datasets and models do not support multi-view, multi-resolution imaging, EHR integration, or domain knowledge, features essential for clinical diagnosis. Furthermore, there is a clear mismatch between current evaluation metrics and clinical needs. The clinician survey confirms this disconnect: only 29.8% consider MedVQA systems highly useful. Key concerns include the absence of patient history or domain knowledge (87.2%), preference for manually curated datasets (51.1%), and the need for multi-view image support (78.7%). Additionally, 66% favor models focused on specific anatomical regions, and 89.4% prefer dialogue-based interactive systems. While MedVQA shows strong potential, challenges such as limited multimodal analysis, lack of patient context, and misaligned evaluation approaches must be addressed for effective clinical integration.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。