\begin{table}[tb]
\centering
\caption{\textbf{Single- vs. two-stage retrieval.} Retrieval performance across anatomical regions. The two-stage method consistently improves binary fracture matching, fracture classification, fracture diagnosis, and radiologist-rated clinical relevance compared with single-stage retrieval.}
\begin{tabular}{l rrr}
\hline
Method & Distal Radius & Distal Ulna & Ulnar Styloid \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textit{Binary Fracture Matching}} \\
\hline
Single-stage   & 0.824 & 0.458 & 0.374 \\
\rowcolor{gray!20}
\textbf{Two-stage}      & \textbf{0.864} & \textbf{0.666} & \textbf{0.522} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textit{Fracture Classification Matching}} \\
\hline
Single-stage   & 0.534 & 0.372 & 0.344 \\
\rowcolor{gray!20}
\textbf{Two-stage}      & \textbf{0.578} & \textbf{0.542} & \textbf{0.468} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textit{Radiologist Assesment}} \\
\hline
Single-stage   & 3.47 & 3.45 & 3.16 \\
\rowcolor{gray!20}
\textbf{Two-stage}      & \textbf{4.22} & \textbf{4.42} & \textbf{4.41} \\
\hline
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{\textit{Retrieval-based Fracture Diagnosis}} \\
\hline
Single-stage   & 0.897 & 0.574 & 0.233 \\
\rowcolor{gray!20}
\textbf{Two-stage}      & \textbf{0.934} & \textbf{0.771} & \textbf{0.554} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:cond-retrieval}
\end{table}
