ArticleArtificial intelligence review2025
Comprehensive review of reinforcement learning for medical ultrasound imaging.
Article in Artificial intelligence review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automatic probe guidance for volumetric liver ultrasound acquisition via imitation learning from a virtual expert.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Foundation Models Meet Medical Image Interpretation.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- Dual-database Bibliometric Analysis Combined with Gephi-based Network Visualization of Artificial Intelligence Applications in the Identification and Diagnosis of Thyroid Space-occupying Lesions.Current medical imaging · 2026Article
- Ultrasound medicine in the era of precision theranostics: Mechanisms, molecular strategies, and clinical translation.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 2026Review
- Super-resolution ultrasound quantifying microvascular alterations for early detection of metastatic cervical lymph nodes: a prospective diagnostic study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence for the Diagnosis and Management of Cancers: Potentials and Challenges.MedComm · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medical Ultrasound (US) imaging has seen increasing demands over the past years, becoming one of the most preferred imaging modalities in clinical practice due to its affordability, portability, and real-time capabilities. However, it faces several challenges that limit its applicability, such as operator dependency, variability in interpretation, and limited resolution, which are amplified by the low availability of trained experts. This calls for the need of autonomous systems that are capable of reducing the dependency on humans for increased efficiency and throughput. Reinforcement Learning (RL) comes as a rapidly advancing field under Artificial Intelligence (AI) that allows the development of autonomous and intelligent agents through rewarded interactions with their environments. Several existing surveys on advancements in US imaging predominantly focus on partially autonomous AI solutions. However, none of these surveys explore the intersection between the stages of the US process and the recent advancements in RL solutions. To bridge this gap, this survey proposes a comprehensive taxonomy that integrates the stages of the US process with the RL development pipeline -including data preparation, problem formulation, simulation environment, RL training, validation and finetuning- and reviews current research efforts under this taxonomy. This work aims to highlight the potential of RL in building autonomous US solutions while identifying limitations and opportunities for further advancements in this field.
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.