RadAnnotate: Large Language Models for Efficient and Reliable Radiology Report Annotation
Authors: Saisha Pradeep Shetty, Roger Eric Goldman, Vladimir Filkov
Organizations: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Davis, CA, USA · Department of Radiology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA
Radiology report annotation is essential for clinical NLP, yet manual labeling is slow and costly. We present RadAnnotate, an LLM-based framework that studies retrieval-augmented synthetic reports and confidence-based selective automation to reduce expert effort for labeling in RadGraph. We study RadGraph-style entity labeling (graph nodes) and leave relation extraction (edges) to future work. First, we train entity-specific classifiers on gold-standard reports and characterize their strengths and failure modes across anatomy and observation categories, with uncertain observations hardest to learn. Second, we generate RAG-guided synthetic reports and show that synthetic-only models remain within 1-2 F1 points of gold-trained models, and that synthetic augmentation is especially helpful for uncertain observations in a low-resource setting, improving F1 from 0.61 to 0.70. Finally, by learning entity-specific confidence thresholds, RadAnnotate can automatically annotate 55-90% of reports at 0.86-0.92 entity match score while routing low-confidence cases for expert review.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: RAG-Enhanced Synthetic Data Generation Pipeline
Figure 2: Overview of the multi-model pipeline used for confidence-based automation.
Entity Type
Train Reports
Test Reports
Precision
Recall
F1
ANAT-DP
2033
430
0.9302
0.9444
0.9372
OBS-DP
1856
386
0.9226
0.7967
0.8550
OBS-DA
552
143
0.9664
0.9489
0.9576
OBS-U
309
52
0.8276
0.6857
0.7500
Aggregate
4750
-
0.9117
0.8439
0.8747
Table 1: Annotation Performance Using Gold-Only Training Data
Entity Type
Source
Gold Count
Syn Count
Test Reports
Precision
Recall
F1
ANAT-DP
Gold
2033
0
404
0.9242
0.9390
0.9315
Syn
0
2033
404
0.9128
0.9110
0.9119
Gold+Syn
2033
610
404
0.9152
0.9060
0.9106
OBS-DP
Gold
1856
0
367
0.9216
0.7920
0.8519
Syn
0
1856
367
0.8865
0.8010
0.8416
Gold+Syn
1856
556
367
0.9104
0.7268
0.8083
Table 2: Comparison of Annotation Performance Across Gold, Synthetic, and Gold+Synthetic (30%) Training Data.
Gold
Syn
% Syn
Precision
Recall
F1
50
0
0%
0.6170 ± 0.0597
0.5976 ± 0.0228
0.6053 ± 0.0297
50
12
25%
0.6378 ± 0.0617
0.6329 ± 0.0554
0.6309 ± 0.0213
50
25
50%
0.6953 ± 0.0449
0.6329 ± 0.0262
0.6622 ± 0.0307
50
37
75%
0.7272 ± 0.0261
0.6847 ± 0.0389
0.7051 ± 0.0317
50
50
100%
0.7139 ± 0.0231
0.7082 ± 0.0417
0.7103 ± 0.0247
50
62
125%
0.7275 ± 0.0275
0.6871 ± 0.0321
0.7060 ± 0.0212
Table 3: Incremental synthetic augmentation results for OBS-U using 50 gold reports.
Entity Type
Positive Count
Negative Count
Precision
Recall
F1
ANAT-DP
2033
392
0.9060
0.9172
0.9116
OBS-DP
1856
569
0.9084
0.7669
0.8317
OBS-DA
552
1500
0.9191
0.9381
0.9285
OBS-U
309
1300
0.4930
0.8235
0.6167
Table 4: Annotation performance with negative sampling (per-label results on the 511-sentence test set)
Entity Type
0.80 Score
0.85 Score
0.90 Score
0.95 Score
ANAT-DP
0.00
0.00
0.74
–
OBS-DP
0.36
0.91
–
–
OBS-DA
0.00
0.79
0.95
0.97
OBS-U
–
–
–
–
Table 5: Minimum Confidence Thresholds Required to Reach Target Match Score Levels (Validation Split)
Table 6: Final Automation Results (a) 90% (top) and (b) 95% (bottom) Cutoffs
Department of Artificial Intelligence and AI Research Center, Chang Gung University · Department of Radiology, Sijhih Cathay General Hospital · Department of Medical Imaging and Intervention, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital +2
School of Computer Science, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom. · School of Medicine, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom.