Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40297121›Full record

ReviewThe Indian journal of radiology & imaging2025

A Radiologist's Perspective of Medical Annotations for AI Programs: The Entire Journey from Its Planning to Execution, Challenges Faced.

Anuradha Rao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Indian journal of radiology & imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
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

1 author.

Anuradha RaoDepartment of Clinical Science, Philips Innovation Campus, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0001-9995-5509

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology and medical science is finding increasing applications with annotations being an integral part of AI development. While annotation may be perceived as passive work of labeling a certain anatomy, the radiologist plays a more important role in this task apart from marking the structures needed. Apart from annotation, more important aspect of their role is planning the anatomies/pathologies needed, type of annotations to be done, choice of the annotation tool, training the annotators, planning the duration of annotation, etc. A close interaction with the technical team is a key factor in the success of the annotations. The quality check of both the internally and externally annotated data, creating a team of good annotators, training them, and periodically reviewing the quality of data become an integral part of their work. Documentation related to the annotation work is another important area where the clinician plays an integral role to comply with the Food and Drug Administration requirements, focused on a clinically explainable and validated AI algorithms. Thus, the clinician becomes an integral part in the ideation, design, implementation/execution of annotations, and its quality control. This article summarizes the experiences gained during planning and executing the annotations for multiple annotation projects involving various imaging modalities with different pathologies.

Indexed as

annotationsannotation toolartificial intelligencechallengesdatamachine learningperspectiveradiologist

Identifiers

PMID40297121
PMCPMC12034397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.