Reliability- and Anatomy-Consistency-Aware Multimodal Learning for Robust Fracture Classification from Bangladeshi Radiographs
Organizations: Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh · Department of Materials and Metallurgical Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh
Abstract
Background: Multimodal fracture classifiers may benefit from patient and anatomical metadata, but they can also become brittle when contextual information is missing or mismatched. Methods: We studied 1493 radiographs from the Bangladeshi OrthoFrac-XR dataset using leakage-safe age, sex, bone type, and laterality. A ConvNeXt image encoder was combined with a clinical multilayer perceptron through concatenation, late fusion, reliability-gated residual fusion, and a hierarchical state-location formulation. We additionally introduced an anatomy-consistency gate that attenuates metadata corrections when an image-side anatomical prediction disagrees with the reported bone type. Results: Across five folds and three seeds, hierarchical residual fusion achieved a macro-F1 of 0.6046 +/- 0.0279, compared with 0.5727 +/- 0.0270 for image-only learning, while improving the Brier score from 0.5239 to 0.4948. In a five-fold robustness experiment, anatomy-consistency fusion reduced the macro-F1 loss under shuffled metadata from 0.0567 to 0.0203 relative to ordinary residual fusion, although its clean-data macro-F1 was lower. Without bone type at inference, auxiliary anatomy supervision improved macro-F1 from 0.5620 +/- 0.0330 to 0.5899 +/- 0.0289. Conclusions: Structured context improves fracture classification, and consistency-aware gating limits harm from mismatched metadata. The observed clean-performance-robustness trade-off and the absence of patient-level identifiers motivate external and prospective validation.
Figures & tables
| Class | Number of Radiographs | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Non-fracture | 576 | 38.6 |
| Post-fracture | 349 | 23.4 |
| Distal fracture | 314 | 21.0 |
| Proximal fracture | 254 | 17.0 |
| Total | 1493 | 100.0 |
| Feature Set | Macro-F1 | Balanced Accuracy | Macro-AUROC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex only | 0.1391 0.0055 | 0.2500 | 0.5167 0.0135 |
| Age + sex | 0.3274 0.0212 | 0.3300 | 0.6127 0.0223 |
| Age + sex + laterality | 0.3254 0.0231 | 0.3270 | 0.6146 0.0219 |
| Bone type only | 0.4401 0.0388 | 0.4510 | 0.6873 0.0220 |
| All permitted metadata | 0.4984 0.0413 | 0.5030 | 0.7498 0.0132 |
| Model | Accuracy | Balanced Acc. | Macro-F1 | Macro-AUROC | Brier | ECE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical MLP | 0.4945 | 0.4978 | 0.4830 | 0.7436 | 0.6444 | 0.0730 |
| Image only | 0.5988 | 0.5735 | 0.5727 | 0.8331 | 0.5239 | 0.0698 |
| Hierarchical image only | 0.6048 | 0.5695 | 0.5731 | 0.8346 | 0.5189 | 0.0671 |
| Late fusion | 0.6115 | 0.5890 | 0.5873 | 0.8433 | 0.5219 | 0.0959 |
| Concatenation | 0.6249 | 0.6009 | 0.6015 | 0.8491 | 0.4976 | 0.0702 |
| Residual Fusion | 0.6289 | 0.6019 | 0.6027 | 0.8472 | 0.4969 | 0.0603 |
| Feature Set | Model | Macro-F1 | Macro-AUROC | Brier | ECE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All metadata | Image only | 0.5577 | 0.8225 | 0.5361 | 0.0649 |
| Concatenation | 0.6031 | 0.8503 | 0.4934 | 0.0703 | |
| Residual Fusion | 0.6012 | 0.8480 | 0.4993 | 0.0603 | |
| Hierarchical Residual Fusion | 0.5821 | 0.8476 | 0.5031 | 0.0700 | |
| Anatomy-Consistency Fusion | 0.5846 | 0.8441 | 0.5044 | 0.0571 | |
| Hierarchical Anatomy-Consistency Fusion | 0.5965 | 0.8429 | 0.5080 | 0.0578 |
| Model | Clean | All Missing | Shuffled | 50% Wrong Bone | 100% Wrong Bone |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residual Fusion | 0.6012 | 0.5728 ( ) | 0.5445 ( ) | 0.5855 ( ) | 0.5678 ( ) |
| Hierarchical Residual Fusion | 0.5821 | 0.5505 ( ) | 0.5321 ( ) | 0.5632 ( ) | 0.5438 ( ) |
| Anatomy-Consistency Fusion | 0.5846 | 0.5661 ( ) | 0.5643 ( ) | 0.5767 ( ) | 0.5663 ( ) |
| Hierarchical Anatomy-Consistency Fusion | 0.5965 | 0.5640 ( ) | 0.5610 ( ) | 0.5798 ( ) | 0.5627 ( ) |