MedRepBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Medical Report Interpretation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16674v1
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 07:52:45 GMT
• Title: MedRepBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Medical Report Interpretation
• Authors: Fangxin Shang, Yuan Xia, Dalu Yang, Yahui Wang, Binglin Yang,
• Abstract summary: We introduce MedRepBench, a comprehensive benchmark built from 1,900 de-identified real-world Chinese medical reports.<n>The benchmark is designed primarily to evaluate end-to-end VLMs for structured medical report understanding.<n>We also observe that the OCR+LLM pipeline, despite strong performance, suffers from layout-blindness and latency issues.
• Score: 2.3251933592942247
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Medical report interpretation plays a crucial role in healthcare, enabling both patient-facing explanations and effective information flow across clinical systems. While recent vision-language models (VLMs) and large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated general document understanding capabilities, there remains a lack of standardized benchmarks to assess structured interpretation quality in medical reports. We introduce MedRepBench, a comprehensive benchmark built from 1,900 de-identified real-world Chinese medical reports spanning diverse departments, patient demographics, and acquisition formats. The benchmark is designed primarily to evaluate end-to-end VLMs for structured medical report understanding. To enable controlled comparisons, we also include a text-only evaluation setting using high-quality OCR outputs combined with LLMs, allowing us to estimate the upper-bound performance when character recognition errors are minimized. Our evaluation framework supports two complementary protocols: (1) an objective evaluation measuring field-level recall of structured clinical items, and (2) an automated subjective evaluation using a powerful LLM as a scoring agent to assess factuality, interpretability, and reasoning quality. Based on the objective metric, we further design a reward function and apply Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) to improve a mid-scale VLM, achieving up to 6% recall gain. We also observe that the OCR+LLM pipeline, despite strong performance, suffers from layout-blindness and latency issues, motivating further progress toward robust, fully vision-based report understanding.

Related papers

• CARE: Towards Clinical Accountability in Multi-Modal Medical Reasoning with an Evidence-Grounded Agentic Framework [29.22693846221723]
  We introduce CARE, advancing Clinical Accountability in multi-modal medical Reasoning with an Evidence-grounded agentic framework.<n> CARE decomposes the task into coordinated sub-modules to reduce shortcut learning and hallucination.<n>Our CARE-Flow improves average accuracy by 10.9% over the same size (10B) state-of-the-art (SOTA)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T08:38:37Z)
• Towards Reliable Medical LLMs: Benchmarking and Enhancing Confidence Estimation of Large Language Models in Medical Consultation [97.36081721024728]
  We propose the first benchmark for assessing confidence in multi-turn interaction during realistic medical consultations.<n>Our benchmark unifies three types of medical data for open-ended diagnostic generation.<n>We present MedConf, an evidence-grounded linguistic self-assessment framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T04:51:39Z)
• MedAlign: A Synergistic Framework of Multimodal Preference Optimization and Federated Meta-Cognitive Reasoning [52.064286116035134]
  We develop MedAlign, a framework to ensure visually accurate LVLM responses for Medical Visual Question Answering (Med-VQA)<n>We first propose a multimodal Direct Preference Optimization (mDPO) objective to align preference learning with visual context.<n>We then design a Retrieval-Aware Mixture-of-Experts (RA-MoE) architecture that utilizes image and text similarity to route queries to a specialized and context-augmented LVLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-24T02:11:05Z)
• MedFactEval and MedAgentBrief: A Framework and Workflow for Generating and Evaluating Factual Clinical Summaries [5.657902269529416]
  evaluating factual accuracy in Large Language Model (LLM)-generated clinical text is a critical barrier to adoption.<n>We introduce MedFactEval, a framework for scalable, fact-grounded evaluation.<n>We present MedAgentBrief, a model-agnostic, multi-step workflow designed to generate high-quality, factual summaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-07T00:41:47Z)
• Med-CoDE: Medical Critique based Disagreement Evaluation Framework [72.42301910238861]
  The reliability and accuracy of large language models (LLMs) in medical contexts remain critical concerns.<n>Current evaluation methods often lack robustness and fail to provide a comprehensive assessment of LLM performance.<n>We propose Med-CoDE, a specifically designed evaluation framework for medical LLMs to address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T16:51:11Z)
• Quantifying the Reasoning Abilities of LLMs on Real-world Clinical Cases [48.87360916431396]
  We introduce MedR-Bench, a benchmarking dataset of 1,453 structured patient cases, annotated with reasoning references.<n>We propose a framework encompassing three critical examination recommendation, diagnostic decision-making, and treatment planning, simulating the entire patient care journey.<n>Using this benchmark, we evaluate five state-of-the-art reasoning LLMs, including DeepSeek-R1, OpenAI-o3-mini, and Gemini-2.0-Flash Thinking, etc.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-06T18:35:39Z)
• EchoQA: A Large Collection of Instruction Tuning Data for Echocardiogram Reports [0.0]
  We introduce a novel question-answering (QA) dataset using echocardiogram reports sourced from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care database.<n>This dataset is specifically designed to enhance QA systems in cardiology, consisting of 771,244 QA pairs addressing a wide array of cardiac abnormalities and their severity.<n>We compare large language models (LLMs), including open-source and biomedical-specific models for zero-shot evaluation, and closed-source models for zero-shot and three-shot evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-04T07:45:45Z)
• LlaMADRS: Prompting Large Language Models for Interview-Based Depression Assessment [75.44934940580112]
  This study introduces LlaMADRS, a novel framework leveraging open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate depression severity assessment.<n>We employ a zero-shot prompting strategy with carefully designed cues to guide the model in interpreting and scoring transcribed clinical interviews.<n>Our approach, tested on 236 real-world interviews, demonstrates strong correlations with clinician assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-07T08:49:04Z)
• MEDIC: Towards a Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating LLMs in Clinical Applications [2.838746648891565]
  We introduce MEDIC, a framework assessing Large Language Models (LLMs) across five critical dimensions of clinical competence. We apply MEDIC to evaluate LLMs on medical question-answering, safety, summarization, note generation, and other tasks. Results show performance disparities across model sizes, baseline vs medically finetuned models, and have implications on model selection for applications requiring specific model strengths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T14:44:51Z)
• Attribute Structuring Improves LLM-Based Evaluation of Clinical Text Summaries [56.31117605097345]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to generate accurate clinical text summaries, but still struggle with issues regarding grounding and evaluation.<n>Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using Attribute Structuring (AS), which structures the summary evaluation process.<n>AS consistently improves the correspondence between human annotations and automated metrics in clinical text summarization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-01T21:59:03Z)
• Evaluation of General Large Language Models in Contextually Assessing Semantic Concepts Extracted from Adult Critical Care Electronic Health Record Notes [17.648021186810663]
  The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in understanding and processing real-world clinical notes. The GPT family models have demonstrated considerable efficiency, evidenced by their cost-effectiveness and time-saving capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T16:52:37Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.