mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Automated Clinical Report Generation for Remote Cognitive Remediation: Comparing Knowledge-Engineered Templates and LLMs in Low-Resource Settings

arXiv 2605.06594 ↗First posted 7 May 2026cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The growing demand for cognitive remediation therapy, combined with limited speech therapist availability, has accelerated the adoption of remote rehabilitation tools. These systems generate large volumes of interaction data that are difficult for clinicians to review efficiently. This paper investigates automated clinical report generation for avatar-guided, home-based cognitive remediation sessions in a low-resource setting with no reference reports. We present and compare two approaches: (1) a rule-based template system encoding speech therapy domain knowledge as explicit decision rules and validated templates, ensuring clinical reliability and traceability; and (2) a zero-shot LLM-based approach (GPT-4) aimed at more fluent and concise output. Both systems use identical pre-extracted, expert-validated structured variables, enabling a controlled factual comparison. Outputs were evaluated by eight speech therapists and final-year students using a nine-criterion questionnaire. Results reveal a clear trade-off between clinical reliability and linguistic quality. The template-based system scored higher on fluidity, coherence, and results presentation, while GPT-4 produced more concise output. Directional differences are consistent across evaluation dimensions, though no comparison reached statistical significance after correction, reflecting the scale constraints of expert clinical evaluation. Based on evaluator feedback, we derive eight design recommendations for clinical reporting systems in remote rehabilitation settings. More broadly, this work contributes a replicable methodology combining expert elicitation, taxonomy-driven generation, and multi-dimensional human evaluation for clinical NLG in low-resource settings, and illustrates how controlled comparisons can inform the responsible adoption of generative AI in healthcare.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 May 2026.

Builds on

15 of 39 references.

References · 15

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2020wav2vec 2.0: A Framework for Self-Supervised Learning of Speech Representationscited by 3,853
  4. 2023Large Language Modelscited by 774
  5. 2023Instruction Tuning for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 617
  6. 2017Survey of the State of the Art in Natural Language Generation: Core tasks, applications and evaluationcited by 206
  7. 2019A Review of Automated Speech and Language Features for Assessment of Cognitive and Thought Disorderscited by 11
  8. 2018Making effective use of healthcare data using data-to-text technologycited by 9
  9. 2024Towards Adapting Open-Source Large Language Models for Expert-Level Clinical Note Generationcited by 9
  10. 2022Consultation Checklists: Standardising the Human Evaluation of Medical Note Generationcited by 8
  11. 2023The Impact of ChatGPT and LLMs on Medical Imaging Stakeholders: Perspectives and Use Casescited by 7
  12. 2023PSentScore: Evaluating Sentiment Polarity in Dialogue Summarizationcited by 4
3 more
  1. 2023Can GPT models Follow Human Summarization Guidelines? A Study for Targeted Communication Goalscited by 4
  2. 2025Natural Language Generation in Healthcare: A Review of Methods and Applicationscited by 3
  3. 2024THERADIA WoZ: An Ecological Corpus for Appraisal-based Affect Research in Healthcarecited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.