Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41321766›Full record

ArticleBrain & spine2025

Diagnostic performance and clinical applications of artificial intelligence for intracranial bleeding detection: A meta-analysis.

Mustafa S Alhasan, Ahmed Y Azzam, Ayman S Alhasan, Arjun Kalyanpur, Omar A Alharthi, Mohammad Khalil, Adam Dmytriw, Muhammed Amir Essibayi, Fabricio Feltrin, James Milburn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain & spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Mustafa S AlhasanDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed Y AzzamDepartment of Neuroradiology, Rockefeller Neuroscience Institute, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, USA.
Ayman S AlhasanDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Arjun KalyanpurDepartment of Radiology, Teleradiology Solutions, 22 Llanfair Rd UNIT 6, Ardmore, PA, 19003, USA.
Omar A AlharthiDepartment of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammad KhalilFaculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
Adam DmytriwNeurovascular Centre, Departments of Medical Imaging & Neurosurgery, St. Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Muhammed Amir EssibayiMontefiore-Einstein Cerebrovascular Research Lab, Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.
Fabricio FeltrinDivision of Radiology - Neuroradiology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, University of Texas Southwestern, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.
James MilburnThe University of Queensland Medical School, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a neurological emergency with high mortality rates requiring timely diagnosis. While computed tomography (CT) remains the gold standard, diagnostic accuracy varies with radiologist experience and workload. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of AI algorithms in detecting ICH on CT imaging and to explore key considerations for their clinical implementation in emergency and teleradiology settings. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA-DTA guidelines, searching seven databases up to May 2025. Studies evaluating AI diagnostic accuracy for ICH detection on non-contrast CT scans were included. Quality assessment used QUADAS-2 criteria. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models, with subgroup analyses by algorithm architecture and ICH subtype. Results: A total of 45 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 29 research algorithm evaluations (n = 185,847 patients) and 16 studies of commercial AI system implementations (n = 94,523 patients). Research algorithms demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.890 (95 % CI: 0.839-0.942) and specificity of 0.926 (95 % CI: 0.899-0.954). Commercial AI systems exhibited slightly superior performance, with sensitivity of 0.899 (95 % CI: 0.858-0.940) and specificity of 0.951 (95 % CI: 0.928-0.974). Diagnostic accuracy varied notably across ICH subtypes, with epidural hemorrhage presenting the greatest detection challenge (difficulty score: 0.251). Among algorithmic designs, convolutional recurrent neural networks (CNN-RNNs) demonstrated the highest diagnostic performance. In real-world clinical implementation, AI integration demonstrated substantial workflow improvements: door-to-treatment decision time reduced by 26 % (92 → 68 min), critical case notification time decreased by 57 % (75 → 32 min), and triage accuracy improved by 8 % (86 %→94 %), directly impacting patient care pathways. Despite a 7-8 % sensitivity reduction compared to benchmark settings, these clinical benefits were consistent across implementations. Conclusions: AI algorithms demonstrate strong diagnostic performance in detecting ICH, with commercial systems demonstrating superior specificity compared to research models. Despite notable performance gaps in detecting certain hemorrhage subtypes, particularly epidural hemorrhage, the clinical benefits of AI integration, including improved workflow efficiency and reduced time to treatment decisions, are substantial. Future research should prioritize prospective validation and the development of algorithms tailored to enhance detection across challenging ICH subtypes.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceComputed tomographyDeep learningDiagnostic accuracyIntracranial hemorrhageNeuroimaging

Identifiers

PMID41321766
PMCPMC12657341

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.