类不平衡策略基准研究:揭示胸部X光与EHR多模态分类中的数据泄漏问题
Leakage- and Label-Aware Benchmarking of Class-Imbalance Strategies for Multimodal Chest X-Ray and EHR Classification
一篇挺扎心的审计论文:老一套的类不平衡方法在去掉数据泄漏后基本没用,做医疗影像的人建议都看看这套诊断协议。
该研究在 MIMIC-CXR 的 29,083 张影像、10,479 名患者、八个诊断目标上审计了类不平衡策略基准。发现按记录划分的基准存在泄漏:仅复制开发集同 EHR 向量影像标签的查找表几乎追平最佳模型。追溯 MIMIC-IV 标签来源后发现,标签来自单次入院的诊断编码关键词匹配,约三分之一影像的标签与自身入院编码不符。改为患者分离评估并对齐入院后,任何类不平衡策略相对无增强的 macro F2 提升不超过 0.01,RAD-DINO 在自监督预训练中见过其中 96.6% 的影像。
Leakage- and Label-Aware Benchmarking of Class-Imbalance Strategies for Multimodal Chest X-Ray and EHR Classification
Benchmarks of class-imbalance strategies for multimodal chest X-ray (CXR) and electronic health record (EHR) prediction are often evaluated on record-level splits of cohorts in which one patient contributes several radiographs. We audit such a benchmark on 29,083 MIMIC-CXR radiographs of 10,479 patients with eight diagnosis targets. First, the record-split benchmark was misleading: a lookup table that copies the label of a development-set radiograph with the same EHR vector nearly matched the best model, and on unseen patients every model fell to the level of predicting every case positive. Second, tracing the labels back to MIMIC-IV explained why: each patient's labels are keyword matches on the diagnosis codes of a single admission, copied, with one EHR vector per patient, to all of the patient's radiographs, so about a third of the radiographs carry labels that differ from the codes of their own admission. Third, under patient-separated evaluation with admission-aligned and rule-refined labels, the initial conclusions do not hold: in the evaluated configurations no imbalance strategy raised the observed mean macro F2 over no augmentation by more than 0.01, tuned tree ensembles showed no consistent advantage over tuned logistic regression, and the released EHR variables stayed at the level of the all-positive baseline, whereas the diagnostic history available at imaging time and image embeddings exceeded it, including, with rule-refined labels, a CheXpert-trained encoder that never saw these radiographs; RAD-DINO had seen 96.6% of them during self-supervised pretraining. Adding either encoder to the diagnostic history gave no statistically significant F2 gain; exploratory AUROC gains were significant with RAD-DINO but not with DenseNet. We provide reusable diagnostics, a leakage-aware protocol and a checklist.