TRUST: Threshold-Recalibrated Uncertainty-Safe Training for Certified Dismissal in Breast Cancer Screening

Reducing the review of clearly cancer-negative screening mammograms could lower radiologist workload without compromising cancer detection. We propose a closed-loop threshold-aware training strategy in which the dismissal threshold is recalculated during training and used to penalize cancer-positive images that approach the dismissal region. We evaluated the method on NLBS and RSNA using five controlled training configurations, with case-level assessment based on a one-sided 99\% Clopper--Pearson upper bound for cancer prevalence among dismissed cases. The proposed model achieved the highest case-level dismissal rates at both 98\% and 95\% recall targets. On NLBS, dismissal reached 19.74\% and 21.70\%, while the cross-entropy baseline did not meet either recall target. On RSNA, dismissal improved from 7.04\% to 14.31\% and from 13.49\% to 19.69\%. In external RSNA$\to$NLBS evaluation, the proposed model achieved dismissal rates of 12.95\% and 19.87\% at the 98\% and 95\% recall targets, respectively. These results support closed-loop threshold-aware training for high-recall selective dismissal.

EVADE: Evidence-Verified Agentic Diagnosis with Escape

Medical vision-language models (VLMs) can achieve high accuracy but remain unreliable: they are systematically overconfident, benefit little from test-time reasoning, and lack the ability to reliably calibrate trust in their own responses. We introduce EVADE (Evidence-Verified Agentic Diagnosis with Escape), an inferential, non-training method that enhances the safety of deploying a single frozen VLM. EVADE responds and, when uncertain, localises the region most diagnostically relevant, re-answers on a zoomed view, and commits only when both the entire image and the zoomed view responses agree; otherwise, it abstains. To directly address verification hallucination in single-model self-checking, our main idea is to verify gate consistency across different image views rather than re-reading the model's own text. Experimental evaluation on VQA-RAD, SLAKE, and PathVQA using Qwen2.5-VL-7B reports that EVADE is the only method that simultaneously improves both calibration and selective risk while maintaining accuracy, reducing expected calibration error (ECE) by up to 45% compared to zero-shot. Chain-of-thought, self-consistency, and self-verification all fail at least one axis. A grounding analysis reports that self-proposed regions perform better at diagnostic structure localisation than centres or random crops. However, a 7B VLM cannot use this localisation to revise answers. Therefore, reliability gains come from the consistency gate and calibrated abstention.

Uncertainty Identifies Difficult Samples Across Methods: A Multi-Task Study on a Heterogeneous Skin Lesion Dataset

Skin lesion classifiers can be confidently wrong on the cases that matter most, so knowing when a prediction should not be trusted is clinically as useful as the prediction. We study uncertainty quantification on a dataset pooled from many ISIC sources, with a shared backbone and two jointly learned heads: a binary malignant versus non-malignant head and a five-class diagnostic head. Five UQ methods (MC Dropout, DropConnect, Flipout, Deep Ensembles, DUQ) are compared on accuracy, calibration, uncertainty decomposition, and risk-coverage. Difficulty is largely method-agnostic: even methods with narrow entropy distributions rank the same samples as hard (per-sample entropy correlations of $0.54$ to $0.91$). The choice of method matters more for calibration and uncertainty decomposition, where Deep Ensembles is the clear winner, than for finding difficult cases. The ranking is also good enough that deferring the most uncertain cases removes a disproportionate share of errors, supporting uncertainty-based selective referral, evaluated here in-distribution only.

ConfTriage: A Calibration-Aware LLM Triage Framework for Pulmonary Nodule Malignancy with Selective Specialist Deferral

Pulmonary nodule malignancy prediction typically depends on image-trained specialist deep learning (DL) models that require substantial annotated imaging data and task-specific training. We investigate whether a generalist large language model (LLM), reading only a faithful natural-language rendering of standard nodule attributes, can serve as a calibrated triage layer. We propose ConfTriage, a confidence-calibrated method built on three pillars: language as the modality, calibration as the safety mechanism, and a selective specialist DL backstop for low-confidence cases. We prove two guarantees: a finite-sample combined-error bound yielding an explicit per-threshold operational certificate, and an oracle inequality showing that excess risk over the Bayes-optimal deferral classifier is controlled by the L1 calibration error of the LLM probability. A controlled seven-way input ablation across five frontier LLMs on LIDC-IDRI shows that natural-language descriptions dominate the diagnostic signal, while low-level image statistics are essentially diagnostically vacuous. ConfTriage achieved an F1 score of 88.22% and an AUC of 0.92, resolving 76.5% of cases using zero-shot LLM inference alone and referring only uncertain cases to the specialist DL backstop. These results demonstrate that clinically meaningful diagnostic information can be captured through structured radiological descriptions and leveraged by calibrated LLMs for selective referral. The framework suggests a practical pathway for combining generalist LLM prediction with specialist AI models in medical decision-support systems. Source code is publicly available at https://github.com/rabiul-ai/ConfTriage.

One Score, Two Decisions: Selective Prediction on the Rare-Disease Tail

Given a patient's clinical findings, a diagnostic system ranks possible diseases and must decide when to endorse its first prediction or defer it for review. This decision is usually made by thresholding the top score. Selective prediction over ranked outputs begins with two checks. First, the ranker must produce enough correct top-ranked predictions to make the target feasible. Across 2,000 patient records stratified by disease prevalence, eight small open-weight LLMs achieve at most 4.6% Recall@1 on ultra-rare diseases. At 10% coverage, even a perfect confidence ranking of their existing predictions therefore cannot reach 50% selective accuracy. More accurate models pass the same check, showing that the limit is regime-specific. Second, the confidence signal must match the decision being made. For fixed-candidate rankers, the top-two margin cancels components shared across candidates. On phenotype-only Exomiser, it selects 10% of cases at 29.0% accuracy, compared with 13.3% overall, while the top score provides no reliable gate. Yet that cancellation can remove information needed to detect whether the candidate list contains an answer. SciFact retrieval and biomedical entity linking confirm this distinction. Finally, we prove that unlabelled scores alone cannot determine whether switching to the margin will help.

CRS-Triage: Confidence- and Reliability-Aware Selective Triage under Incomplete Clinical Evidence

Emergency triage requires reliable decisions within a short time period. However, the available electronic health record (EHR) data, including structured data and clinical text, are often incomplete, unreliable, and inconsistent. This makes machine learning (ML)-based triage prediction more challenging, as existing ML models typically rely on complete and reliable EHR data to accurately predict patients' acuity levels. To address this, we propose confidence- and reliability-aware selective triage (CRS-Triage) to predict patients' acuity levels with a confidence score. By comparing the confidence score with a predefined threshold, CRS-Triage can selectively determine whether the model should make the decision or defer the case. Specifically, CRS-Triage separately evaluates the reliability of structured data and clinical text and then jointly considers the consistency between the two modalities to estimate the confidence of each prediction. Moreover, to reduce the risk of missing high-acuity patients, namely under-triage, CRS-Triage prefers to assign patients slightly higher acuity levels, namely over-triage, by penalizing under-triage errors. Experiments on the MIMIC-IV-ED dataset show that CRS-Triage achieves strong predictive performance. It also provides a better risk-coverage trade-off and remains reliable when the available EHR data are incomplete, degraded, or inconsistent across modalities.

Monte Carlo Dropout Uncertainty and Entropy-Thresholded Selective Prediction for Architecture-Agnostic Brain Tumor MRI Triage

Deep networks now subtype brain tumors on MRI about as well as specialist readers, yet accuracy is not what keeps them out of the clinic. What matters at the point of care is whether a model's confidence can be trusted to flag the cases it is likely to misclassify and defer them to a human. Deterministic estimates cannot: an auxiliary confidence head trained alongside the classifier collapses to a near-constant output that says nothing about correctness. This study proposes an uncertainty-first pipeline for four-class brain tumor MRI (glioma, meningioma, pituitary, no tumor) that reads predictive uncertainty from Monte Carlo (MC) Dropout over T = 20 passes and turns the resulting entropy into an explicit rule for deferring uncertain cases to a radiologist. We partitioned 7,200 images by perceptual-hash cluster, closing the near-duplicate leakage that inflates accuracy under naive splitting, and evaluated the pipeline on ViT-B/16 and ResNet-50 across five seeds along three axes: discrimination, calibration, and selective prediction. Both discriminate strongly (macro-AUC 0.994; accuracy 0.962 and 0.964), and no seed separates them (0 of 5 significant, p < 0.05), so the result is driven by the uncertainty pipeline, not the network. A single temperature scalar pulls the deterministic softmax into tight calibration (expected calibration error 0.016-0.020), and deferring the most uncertain 5% of cases lifts accuracy on the rest to about 0.98 on both (area under the risk-coverage curve 0.010-0.011). MC-Dropout uncertainty here is thus calibrated, non-collapsing, and directly actionable through a concrete deferral rule, providing an architecture-agnostic basis for calibrated, defer-to-human brain tumor MRI triage under internal validation.

Calibrated Selective Prediction Using Deep Ensembles for ROI-Based Thyroid Nodule Ultrasound Classification Under Dataset Shift: A Retrospective Evaluation

Background: Deep learning models can classify thyroid nodules on ultrasound, but reliable clinical decision support also requires calibrated probabilities, uncertainty estimation, and selective referral, particularly under dataset shift. Methods: We developed a calibrated deterministic five-member deep ensemble for ROI-based thyroid nodule classification and selective image-based triage. TN5000 was used for model development, five-fold cross-validation, member-wise vector-scaling calibration, and fold-specific threshold selection. TN3K served as an independent external dataset-shift evaluation. The framework used ConvNeXt-Tiny with squeeze-and-excitation attention, ensemble-mean malignancy probability, and mutual information (MI) as an ensemble-disagreement score. A three-tier policy assigned images to No-FNA suggestion, FNA recommendation, or radiologist review. Results: On pooled out-of-fold TN5000 predictions, the ensemble achieved AUC-ROC 0.9395, AP 0.9715, ECE 0.0088, and Brier score 0.0813. At 50% nominal MI retention, 7.2% of cases received a No-FNA suggestion, 39.9% an FNA recommendation, and 52.9% radiologist review, with 98.3% No-FNA NPV and 99.83% malignancy capture. On TN3K, AUC-ROC decreased to 0.7870, AP to 0.7254, ECE increased to 0.1899, and Brier score to 0.2281. The frozen TN5000 policy assigned 83.7% to review, 1.0% to No-FNA, and 15.3% to FNA recommendation. No malignant image entered the No-FNA pathway, but FNA-recommendation PPV fell to 76.6%. Conclusion: The framework showed strong internal discrimination and calibration, but limited external threshold transportability. Selective prediction may help identify images unsuitable for automated triage, but local recalibration, threshold validation, and prospective clinical evaluation are required before deployment.

Uncertainty-Aware Last-Layer Adaptation of RETFound for Referable Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Under Dataset Shift

This paper presents a safety-centered empirical evaluation of uncertainty-aware last-layer adaptation for referable diabetic retinopathy screening using RETFound, a self-supervised vision-transformer retinal foundation model used here as a frozen feature encoder, and the public APTOS 2019 and DDR diabetic retinopathy fundus image datasets. We compare a cached-feature softmax head, post-hoc temperature scaling, variational Bayesian last-layer heads, a diagonal Laplace last-layer approximation, and an SNGP-style cached-feature head. On APTOS, uncertainty-aware operating points improved sensitivity and selective-referral behavior. The strongest APTOS selective-referral result deferred approximately 20 percent of cases and reduced accepted-case false negatives to zero while preserving high accepted-case specificity. However, threshold tuning also reduced false negatives at high false-positive cost, so false-negative reduction alone was not unique to Bayesian modeling. On DDR, native Bayesian heads qualitatively reproduced the APTOS direction but with weaker tradeoffs, while the APTOS-trained SNGP checkpoint transferred poorly and failed to provide useful external selective-referral behavior. These results highlight the value of safety-centered evaluation beyond aggregate accuracy: uncertainty-aware last-layer heads can improve internal safety-oriented operating points, but trustworthy retinal screening claims require explicit safety-coverage evaluation and second-dataset validation under shift.

Calibrated Triage, Not Autonomy: Confidence Estimation for Medical Vision-Language Models

A vision-language model can answer a question about a chest radiograph or a pathology slide fluently and confidently while barely using the image, relying instead on language priors. In medicine this is the failure that matters most: the answer looks trustworthy and is not, and the natural safeguard is a confidence score reliable enough to say when the model should abstain. We ask a deployment question rather than an accuracy one: how much medical imaging work a vision-language model can safely defer on its own, and which confidence signal makes that possible. We evaluate nine confidence estimators, spanning training-free logit baselines, prompt-based self-reports, and trained internal probes, across five open-weight LVLMs and three medical VQA datasets covering broad clinical imaging, radiology, and pathology, every probe trained only on natural images and applied to medicine without adaptation. Recast as bounded selective prediction, the comparison is cautionary. Standard metrics mislead: discrimination barely separates the estimators, and a fixed high-confidence cutoff separates them far less than it appears, because their scores sit on incomparable scales; no estimator is reliably best across domains or models. What can be safely deferred is set at two levels: base-model competence fixes a ceiling, and the confidence layer determines how much of it is reachable. At a 20% error tolerance the strongest estimator defers about a quarter of radiology cases under a distribution-free guarantee and a third under a held-out threshold, and little to none of pathology. The usable role is calibrated triage under clinical oversight, not autonomous deferral: a good estimator makes a competent model defer safely where it is competent, but none manufactures reliability where the base model lacks it. We release all outputs, correctness judgments, and confidence scores, with code.