ReviewJournal of imaging2025
Artificial Intelligence in Prostate MRI: Current Evidence and Clinical Translation Challenges-A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of imaging, 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.
- Operationalizing the EU AI Act in a comprehensive cancer center through an institutional governance framework.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Inter-Observer Reproducibility of [18F]FDG PET/CT Radiomic Features in Primary Breast Carcinoma.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Development of a quantitative multiparametric ultrasound and deep learning classifier for the detection of prostate cancer.European radiology · 2026Article
- Comment on "Replacing Multidisciplinary Team Meetings With Artificial Intelligence: Opportunities and Challenges".Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Article
- Optimizing Prostate Biopsy Pathways: Integrating MRI-Targeted, Systematic Sampling, and Clinical Judgment in the PSA-Era.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Multimodal artificial intelligence in urologic precision oncology: from algorithm to translational medicine (a systemized narrative review).Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite rapid proliferation of AI applications in prostate MRI showing impressive technical performance, clinical adoption remains limited. We conducted a comprehensive narrative review of literature from January 2018 to December 2024, examining AI applications in prostate MRI with emphasis on real-world performance and implementation challenges. Among 200+ studies reviewed, AI systems achieve 87% sensitivity and 72% specificity for cancer detection in research settings. However, external validation reveals average performance drops of 12%, with some implementations showing degradation up to 31%. Only 31% of studies follow reporting guidelines, 11% share code, and 4% provide model weights. Seven real-world implementation studies demonstrate integration times of 3-14 months, with one major center terminating deployment due to unacceptable false positive rates. The translation gap between artificial and clinical intelligence remains substantial. Success requires shifting focus from accuracy metrics to patient outcomes, establishing transparent reporting standards, developing realistic economic models, and creating appropriate regulatory frameworks. The field must combine methodological rigor, clinical relevance, and implementation science to realize AI's transformative potential in prostate cancer care.
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.