Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40688886›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: Augmentation, Not Replacement.

Rohan Krishna Nk, Anupama R S, Shivaraj K

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatology: Quo Vadis?Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
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

3 authors.

Rohan Krishna NkEmergency Medicine, Fortis Hospital, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru, IND.
Anupama R SEmergency Medicine, Fortis Hospital, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru, IND.
Shivaraj KInternal Medicine, Fortis Hospital, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly become an influential presence in radiology, offering transformative possibilities in image interpretation, workflow optimization, and diagnostic support. Across healthcare systems worldwide, including resource-limited environments, these innovations hold promise for narrowing diagnostic and equity gaps. While concerns persist that AI may one day replace radiologists, this narrative oversimplifies the realities of clinical practice. Radiology is not merely about pattern recognition but also about clinical judgement, communication, and integration of complex patient data. In this context, AI should not be seen as a threat, but rather as an evolving tool with the potential to complement and enhance the radiologist's role. Current AI applications have already demonstrated considerable utility in well-defined areas. These include the detection of lung nodules, classification of breast lesions, and triage of acute stroke on CT imaging. By automating repetitive tasks and prioritizing critical findings, AI helps improve efficiency and reduce fatigue in high-volume settings. However, the integration of AI into routine clinical workflows brings several challenges that must be addressed. These include algorithmic biases due to non-representative training datasets, limited transparency in decision-making processes, and ethical questions around liability when errors occur. There is also a legitimate concern about over-reliance, particularly among less experienced clinicians, which could inadvertently erode critical thinking. Radiologists must remain at the forefront of AI development and implementation. Their clinical expertise is essential in designing, validating, and overseeing these tools to ensure that their use aligns with patient safety and care standards. AI should serve as an extension of human capabilities, not a replacement for the nuanced interpretation, empathy, and interdisciplinary collaboration that radiologists provide. This editorial explores both the potential and the pitfalls of AI in radiology, emphasizing the need for a balanced, collaborative approach. As the field moves toward greater digital integration, it is crucial to promote innovation that supports rather than diminishes the central role of human judgment. The future of radiology lies not in resisting technology but in shaping it, ensuring that the digital transformation enhances patient outcomes without compromising the human connection at the heart of medicine.

Indexed as

algorithmic biasartificial intelligenceaugmentationclinical decision supportdiagnostic imaginghuman–machine collaborationmedical ethicsradiology

Identifiers

PMID40688886
PMCPMC12271635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.