ReviewRadiology. Artificial intelligence2025
The Evolution of Radiology Image Annotation in the Era of Large Language Models.
Review in Radiology. Artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Open-weight language models for procedural impression generation.European radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although there are relatively few diverse, high-quality medical imaging datasets on which to train computer vision artificial intelligence models, even fewer datasets contain expertly classified observations that can be repurposed to train or test such models. The traditional annotation process is laborious and time-consuming. Repurposing annotations and consolidating similar types of annotations from disparate sources has never been practical. Until recently, the use of natural language processing to convert a clinical radiology report into labels required custom training of a language model for each use case. Newer technologies such as large language models have made it possible to generate accurate and normalized labels at scale, using only clinical reports and specific prompt engineering. The combination of automatically generated labels extracted and normalized from reports in conjunction with foundational image models provides a means to create labels for model training. This article provides a short history and review of the annotation and labeling process of medical images, from the traditional manual methods to the newest semiautomated methods that provide a more scalable solution for creating useful models more efficiently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.