← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2511.09394 · v3
EyeAgent: An Agentic AI System for Multimodal Clinical Decision Support in Ophthalmology
首次提交 2025-11-12 23:03
版本更新 2026-11-02 01:16
雷达观测 2026-11-04 23:43
摘要
Current medical artificial intelligence (AI) systems are often task-specific, poorly integrated, and difficult to interpret, limiting support for multimodal clinical workflows. We developed and evaluated EyeAgent for ophthalmic decision support. EyeAgent comprises three layers including 54 task-specific EyeTools, 32 clinical skills, and a modular large language model reasoning core with interchangeable backbones. A multi-level evaluation distinguished this scope from empirical system-level validation. Component-level evaluation assessed newly developed models on held-out splits of datasets totaling 871,862 samples. System-level evaluation included illustrative cases of workflow breadth, a 200-case expert-rating study of output quality, and an exploratory multicenter reader study comparing unassisted and EyeAgent-assisted performance among 27 ophthalmologists from 11 centers. Skill-level and backbone ablations further assessed orchestration and robustness. In illustrative cases, EyeAgent showed task-specific advantages over GPT-5.5 in lesion quantitation, cross-modality synthesis, and uncertainty-aware reporting. In the expert-rating study, EyeAgent achieved an F1 score of 0.84 for skill selection, with 82.7%-92.0% of outputs rated acceptable or better across six clinical dimensions. In the exploratory multicenter reader study, diagnostic accuracy increased from 72.8% unassisted to 91.9% assisted (difference, 19.1 percentage points (pp); 95% CI, 13.6-24.7; Holm-adjusted P<0.001). Report completeness increased from 55.8% to 75.6% (difference, 19.8 pp; 95% CI, 14.8-24.7; Holm-adjusted P<0.001). Across the evaluated settings, EyeAgent supported interpretable, evidence-guided reasoning and showed potential for human-AI collaboration. Broader real-world effectiveness and generalizability require prospective and cross-population validation.
作者备注：Accepted for publication in NEJM AI
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v3 · 2026-11-02 01:16 · 最新观测版本
EyeAgent: An Agentic AI System for Multimodal Clinical Decision Support in Ophthalmology
Current medical artificial intelligence (AI) systems are often task-specific, poorly integrated, and difficult to interpret, limiting support for multimodal clinical workflows. We developed and evaluated EyeAgent for ophthalmic decision support. EyeAgent comprises three layers including 54 task-specific EyeTools, 32 clinical skills, and a modular large language model reasoning core with interchangeable backbones. A multi-level evaluation distinguished this scope from empirical system-level validation. Component-level evaluation assessed newly developed models on held-out splits of datasets totaling 871,862 samples. System-level evaluation included illustrative cases of workflow breadth, a 200-case expert-rating study of output quality, and an exploratory multicenter reader study comparing unassisted and EyeAgent-assisted performance among 27 ophthalmologists from 11 centers. Skill-level and backbone ablations further assessed orchestration and robustness. In illustrative cases, EyeAgent showed task-specific advantages over GPT-5.5 in lesion quantitation, cross-modality synthesis, and uncertainty-aware reporting. In the expert-rating study, EyeAgent achieved an F1 score of 0.84 for skill selection, with 82.7%-92.0% of outputs rated acceptable or better across six clinical dimensions. In the exploratory multicenter reader study, diagnostic accuracy increased from 72.8% unassisted to 91.9% assisted (difference, 19.1 percentage points (pp); 95% CI, 13.6-24.7; Holm-adjusted P<0.001). Report completeness increased from 55.8% to 75.6% (difference, 19.8 pp; 95% CI, 14.8-24.7; Holm-adjusted P<0.001). Across the evaluated settings, EyeAgent supported interpretable, evidence-guided reasoning and showed potential for human-AI collaboration. Broader real-world effectiveness and generalizability require prospective and cross-population validation.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗