Quest 7.29 - Case-level exploratory study

Multimodal treatment recommendation with auditable clinical reasoning.

The complete 83-case cohort combines preoperative clinical text with AP and lateral DSA views. Every case has an out-of-fold Top-1 and Top-2 recommendation, a model-generated rationale, and an explicit uncertainty statement.

73.5%Any-GT Top-161 of 83 cases
91.6%Any-GT Top-276 of 83 cases
33.7%Exact used-technique agreementStrict single-label comparison
83 / 83Complete two-view cases166 DSA images

What has been completed

From data audit to a complete case-level review set

The technical pipeline covers all 83 cases. Blinded physician review remains the next validation step.

01

Data audit

83 de-identified cases were linked to 166 PNG images. Each case has one AP and one lateral view.

02

Leakage-controlled evaluation

Each case appeared in a held-out test fold exactly once across five folds.

03

Multi-reference scoring

Top-1 and Top-2 predictions were compared with all supplied expert references, preserving disagreement.

04

Reasoning generation

Qwen3.6-27B generated 83 case rationales from model outputs without receiving the reference labels.

Interpretation

Strong candidate coverage, limited exact agreement

Top-2 coverage is high when any expert reference is accepted. Exact agreement with the technique actually used remains modest, reflecting both model error and real treatment-choice variability.

Important limits

Not yet a clinical validation result

  • No patient-to-case mapping was supplied; evaluation is case-level.
  • No independent locked external cohort has been tested.
  • Class scores have not been calibrated as probabilities of clinical correctness.
  • Generated rationales still require blinded physician review.

Cohort organization

One primary grouping, three complementary views

Cases are grouped by the model's Top-1 technique and can be filtered by performance, score separation, and expert-reference agreement.

Primary groupingTop-1 technique
Coil embolization alone55
Stent-assisted coil embolization14
Flow diversion alone7
Balloon-assisted coil embolization3
Flow diversion with coil embolization3
Flow disruption (intra-saccular)1
PerformanceAny expert reference
61Top-1 matches any expert reference
15Top-2 adds a matching option
7Neither Top-1 nor Top-2 matches
UncertaintyTop-1 minus Top-2 score
44Clearer preference (margin >= 0.20)
20Intermediate (margin 0.10-0.20)
19High uncertainty (margin < 0.10)
Reference agreementFour expert labels
12Unanimous expert reference (4/4)
42Expert majority (3/4)
29Substantial expert disagreement

Complete cohort

All 83 de-identified cases

Use the filters to inspect recommendations, failure modes, uncertainty, and expert disagreement without changing the underlying case set.

83cases shown
Case 1Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.2002/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 5Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4342/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 6Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0793/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 7Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.1452/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 8Top-1 hit
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.1002/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 9Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3773/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 10Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4574/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 11Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1662/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 12Top-1 hit
Balloon-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.2112/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 13Top-1 hit
Flow diversion with coil embolizationAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0702/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 14Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Flow disruption (intra-saccular)
Margin 0.2703/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 15Top-1 hit
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.5033/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 16Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3283/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 17Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3174/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 18Top-1 hit
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.0252/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 19Top-1 hit
Balloon-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.0853/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 20Top-2 rescue
Flow disruption (intra-saccular)Alternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.0102/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 22Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3423/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 23Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0393/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 24Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.5972/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 25Top-2 miss
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.5264/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 26Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3002/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 27Top-1 hit
Flow diversion with coil embolizationAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.0324/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 28Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Flow disruption (intra-saccular)
Margin 0.0403/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 29Top-2 miss
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.2124/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 30Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4602/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 31Top-2 miss
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.2804/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 32Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4253/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 33Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.5374/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 37Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3072/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 38Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.3863/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 39Top-2 rescue
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.0162/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 41Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0244/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 42Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0994/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 44Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.3023/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 45Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.4203/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 46Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.1123/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 47Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1642/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 48Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.2473/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 49Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.3162/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 50Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.4543/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 51Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1272/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 52Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3463/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 53Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.4683/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 54Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1513/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 55Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.2332/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 56Top-2 miss
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1543/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 57Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1364/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 58Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0173/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 59Top-2 rescue
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.2342/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 60Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.4373/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 61Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.6362/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 62Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow disruption (intra-saccular)
Margin 0.1073/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 64Top-2 rescue
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.3252/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 66Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.0181/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 71Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.1022/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 72Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.2373/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 73Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4382/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 74Top-1 hit
Balloon-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.1282/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 75Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1533/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 76Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1222/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 77Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.2643/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 78Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4573/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 79Top-2 miss
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.0483/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 80Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.2474/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 81Top-2 miss
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3863/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 82Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4113/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 83Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.2373/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 84Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1773/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 85Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.1633/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 86Top-1 hit
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.1112/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 87Top-1 hit
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.0103/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 88Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.1542/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 89Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.1103/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 90Top-1 hit
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.6373/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 91Top-1 hit
Flow diversion aloneAlternative: Coil embolization alone
Margin 0.0323/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 93Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4833/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 94Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.4893/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 95Top-1 hit
Flow diversion with coil embolizationAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.0363/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 96Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization
Margin 0.1072/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 97Top-2 rescue
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Stent-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.0573/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 98Top-2 miss
Stent-assisted coil embolizationAlternative: Flow diversion alone
Margin 0.0163/4 max expert votes
View case details
Case 100Top-1 hit
Coil embolization aloneAlternative: Balloon-assisted coil embolization
Margin 0.3544/4 max expert votes
View case details

Blinded qualitative physician review

16 selected de-identified cases

Selected to cover confident, ambiguous, adjunctive-device, and retreatment scenarios. Outcome groups and expert-reference agreement are intentionally hidden in this section.

Review progress0 / 16
Ratings are stored only in this browser until exported.

Review case 1 of 16

Case 61

Awaiting review

Assigned out-of-fold recommendation

Coil embolization alone

Alternative: Flow diversion with coil embolization

Top-1 class score73.9%
Top-2 class score10.4%
Scores rank model classes; they are not calibrated probabilities of clinical correctness.
View A - APOpen full size
De-identified DSA image, case 61, AP view
View B - LateralOpen full size
De-identified DSA image, case 61, Lateral view

View A is AP; View B is lateral, as confirmed by the data provider.

Case summary

A 75-year-old male presents with an unruptured right ACA A1 aneurysm measuring 5.3 mm x 4 mm x 5.4 mm with a 3.1 mm neck and a daughter sac.

Image observation

On the supplied views, a saccular outpouching appears on the proximal anterior cerebral artery with a visible neck connecting to the parent vessel.

Model-generated clinical rationale

The documented dimensions and neck width suggest a morphology that may be amenable to endovascular coiling. However, the presence of a daughter sac and the specific neck-to-dome ratio are critical factors that are not fully quantified in the narrative, potentially complicating coil stability.

Model uncertainty

The OOF classifier showed a relatively clear preference for Coil embolization alone over Flow diversion with coil embolization, but its scores are not probabilities of clinical correctness.

Clinical uncertainty / missing factor

The precise neck-to-dome ratio and the exact relationship of the daughter sac to the aneurysm neck are missing, which are essential for determining the feasibility of coil-only treatment versus adjunctive techniques.

Explicit evidence used

Unruptured right ACA A1 aneurysm | Dimensions 5.3 mm x 4 mm x 5.4 mm with 3.1 mm neck | Presence of a daughter sac

Physician assessment

Review the output for this case

1 = lowest - 5 = highest
How clinically reasonable is the recommended technique?
Not reasonable
Highly reasonable
How clinically sound is the stated rationale?
Unsound
Highly sound
How well does the rationale reflect the supplied text and images?
Poorly aligned
Very well aligned
How safe is the wording for research-facing clinical review?
Potentially misleading
Appropriately cautious
Complete all ratings and select a disposition