Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41200652›Full record

ReviewCureus2025

The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Stroke Imaging in Emergency Settings: A Systematic Review.

Anas E Ahmed, Wassal F Aljohani, Liyan K Abu Rukbah, Shahad A Rajhi, Norah K Najmi, Mohammed K Zughlul, Abdulrahman M Alshammari, Sultan D Alotaibi, Taghreed H Almarhabi, Mohammed A Al-Amri and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors.

Anas E AhmedCommunity Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, SAU.
Wassal F AljohaniCollege of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, SAU.
Liyan K Abu RukbahCollege of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, SAU.
Shahad A RajhiCollege of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, SAU.
Norah K NajmiCollege of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, SAU.
Mohammed K ZughlulCollege of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, SAU.
Abdulrahman M AlshammariCollege of Medicine, Hail University, Hail, SAU.
Sultan D AlotaibiCollege of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, SAU.
Taghreed H AlmarhabiCollege of Medicine, Umm Al-Qura University, Al-Qunfudhah, SAU.
Mohammed A Al-AmriCollege of Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, SAU.
Sama B RebhCollege of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, EGY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid and accurate interpretation of neuroimaging is critical in acute stroke, but variability among human readers and the urgency of clinical workflows pose major challenges. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising adjunct in emergency stroke imaging, with the potential to enhance detection, scoring, and prognostication. We systematically reviewed the role of AI in this context, focusing on diagnostic performance, workflow feasibility, and implementation across key imaging modalities. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL was conducted from inception to August 20, 2025, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies were original English-language research that applied AI to emergency stroke imaging. Data were extracted on study design, population, imaging modality, AI architecture, performance metrics, workflow aspects, and interpretability, with study quality assessed using the Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM). Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. AI models achieved high accuracy for intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) detection on non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) scans, with area under the curve (AUC) values up to 0.98. Real-world analyses reported balanced accuracy around 0.93 with near-real-time processing. Automated Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) grading demonstrated almost perfect agreement with expert consensus (κ up to 0.90), outperforming individual radiologists in the hyperacute phase. Ischemic lesion detection using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) applied to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography angiography (CTA) achieved accuracies of 83-86%. Symmetry-based methods further improved performance, though limitations were noted in posterior circulation strokes. Prognostic models integrating imaging and clinical data yielded moderate-to-good performance (AUC 0.79-0.91), with multimodal deep learning outperforming single-modality or clinical-only models. Workflow studies reported AI processing times of 2-4 minutes, although data transfer and system integration remained key bottlenecks. Interpretability tools, such as Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) and Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP), have enhanced transparency in several studies. Overall, AI demonstrates strong diagnostic and workflow potential in emergency stroke imaging, particularly for ICH detection, automated ASPECTS, and large vessel occlusion (LVO) alerts. Multimodal and transformer-based approaches show promise for outcome prediction and lesion segmentation, but further external validation and seamless integration into clinical workflows are required. AI is best positioned as a supportive tool to augment, rather than replace, clinical expertise in acute stroke care.

Indexed as

alberta stroke program early ct scoreartificial intelligenceclinical workflowcomputed tomographydeep learningemergency radiologyintracranial hemorrhagelarge vessel occlusionmagnetic resonance imagingstroke imaging

Identifiers

PMID41200652
PMCPMC12588366

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.