Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33851261›Full record

ReviewPediatric radiology2022

Artificial intelligence development in pediatric body magnetic resonance imaging: best ideas to adapt from adults.

Michael M Moore, Ramesh S Iyer, Nabeel I Sarwani, Raymond W Sze

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pediatric pancreas segmentation from MRI scans with deep learning.Pancreatology : official journal of the International Association of Pancreatology (IAP) ... [et al.] · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. T2 mapping magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage in hemophilia.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Michael M MooreDepartment of Radiology, Penn State Children's Hospital, Penn State Health, 500 University Drive, H066, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA. mmoore5@pennstatehealth.psu.edu.
Ramesh S IyerSeattle Children's Hospital, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Nabeel I SarwaniPenn State Radiology, Penn State Health, Hershey, PA, USA.
Raymond W SzeChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center · USSeattle Children's Hospital · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emerging manifestations of artificial intelligence (AI) have featured prominently in virtually all industries and facets of our lives. Within the radiology literature, AI has shown great promise in improving and augmenting radiologist workflow. In pediatric imaging, while greatest AI inroads have been made in musculoskeletal radiographs, there are certainly opportunities within thoracoabdominal MRI for AI to add significant value. In this paper, we briefly review non-interpretive and interpretive data science, with emphasis on potential avenues for advancement in pediatric body MRI based on similar work in adults. The discussion focuses on MRI image optimization, abdominal organ segmentation, and osseous lesion detection encountered during body MRI in children.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceRadiologyAdultChildHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMagnetic Resonance SpectroscopyRadiographyArtificial intelligenceChildrenConvolutional neural networkMagnetic resonance imagingOptimizationSegmentation

Identifiers

PMID33851261
PMCPMC8043435
OpenAlexW3156515514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.