Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40415390›Full record

ReviewNeurointervention2025

Methodological Challenges in Deep Learning-Based Detection of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Scoping Review.

Bio Joo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurointervention, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Patient and physician perspectives on large language model generated responses about brain aneurysm.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Bio JooDepartment of Radiology, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly deep learning, has demonstrated high diagnostic performance in detecting intracranial aneurysms on computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). However, the clinical translation of these technologies remains limited due to methodological limitations and concerns about generalizability. This scoping review comprehensively evaluates 36 studies that applied deep learning to intracranial aneurysm detection on CTA or MRA, focusing on study design, validation strategies, reporting practices, and reference standards. Key findings include inconsistent handling of ruptured and previously treated aneurysms, underreporting of coexisting brain or vascular abnormalities, limited use of external validation, and an almost complete absence of prospective study designs. Only a minority of studies employed diagnostic cohorts that reflect real-world aneurysm prevalence, and few reported all essential performance metrics, such as patient-wise and lesion-wise sensitivity, specificity, and false positives per case. These limitations suggest that current studies remain at the stage of technical validation, with high risks of bias and limited clinical applicability. To facilitate real-world implementation, future research must adopt more rigorous designs, representative and diverse validation cohorts, standardized reporting practices, and greater attention to human-AI interaction.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceDeep learningIntracranial aneurysmMethodology

Identifiers

PMID40415390
PMCPMC12183370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.