Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41078022›Full record

ReviewKorean journal of radiology2025

Real-World Monitoring of Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: Challenges and Best Practices.

Geraldine Dean, Ernest Montañà, Stavroula Kyriazi, Susan C Shelmerdine, Constantinus F Buckens, Henrik Agrell, Erik Ranschaert, Ante Marusic, Gareth J Davies, Philip Wardle and 4 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Korean journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

14 authors.

Geraldine Dean *Department of Clinical Radiology, Epsom and St Helier NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6063-0194
Ernest Montañà *TMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7424-3023
Stavroula KyriaziTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1578-721X
Susan C ShelmerdineDepartment of Clinical Radiology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6642-9967
Constantinus F BuckensTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3190-258X
Henrik AgrellTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3999-1758
Erik RanschaertFaculty of Medicine, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9375-9750
Ante MarusicTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6644-3774
Gareth J DaviesTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0229-4307
Philip WardleTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8827-1790
Nicola SchembriTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5369-4663
Maria GantenTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4380-8969
Fausto LabrutoTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain. flabruto@telemedicineclinic.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-6510-5812
Björn JobkeTMC, a Unilabs Company, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2073-8902

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into radiology has the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, streamline workflows, and improve patient outcomes. However, successful real-world adoption hinges on robust systems for ongoing monitoring to maintain safety, efficacy, and compliance with regulatory standards. This article delves into the critical need for such monitoring in radiology, examining current regulatory frameworks and proposing actionable strategies for overseeing technical performance, algorithm reliability, and human-AI interactions. Key topics include methods for aligning imaging studies with appropriate AI tools, addressing challenges related to data transmission and processing delays, and evaluating approaches to algorithm performance monitoring, ranging from vendor-based and specialized systems to in-house solutions. The potential of using large language models to help algorithm monitoring is also highlighted as a promising avenue. Additionally, the article explores human-AI interaction challenges, such as automation bias (the tendency of users to overly trust automated decisions), misuse, and underuse, offering strategies to mitigate these risks through structured protocols and ongoing education. By aligning regulatory requirements with practical implementation strategies, comprehensive AI monitoring can optimize diagnostic decision-making while ensuring patient safety.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceRadiologyAlgorithmsHumansAI monitoringAlgorithm performanceArtificial intelligenceHuman–AI interactionPost-market surveillanceRadiologyRegulatory compliance

Identifiers

PMID41078022
PMCPMC12568762

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.