Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41331658›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026

From Embeddings to Accuracy: Comparing Foundation Models for Radiographic Classification.

Xue Li, Jameson Merkow, Noel C F Codella, Alberto Santamaria-Pang, Naiteek Sangani, Alexander Ersoy, Christopher Burt, John W Garrett, Richard J Bruce, Joshua D Warner and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. 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

14 authors.

Xue LiDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA. xue.li@wisc.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3864-6232
Jameson MerkowMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
Noel C F CodellaMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
Alberto Santamaria-PangMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, John Hopkins Medicine, Redmond, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4012-8394
Naiteek SanganiMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
Alexander ErsoyMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
Christopher BurtMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
John W GarrettDepartment of Radiology, Department of Medical Physics, Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine & Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.
Richard J BruceDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Joshua D WarnerDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Tyler BradshawDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Ivan TarapovMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
Matthew P LungrenMicrosoft Health and Life Sciences, Redmond, WA, USA.
Alan B McMillanDepartment of Radiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4502-6522

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foundation models, pre-trained on extensive datasets, have significantly advanced machine learning by providing robust and transferable embeddings applicable to various domains, including medical imaging diagnostics. This study evaluates the utility of embeddings derived from both general-purpose and medical domain-specific foundation models for training lightweight adapter models in multi-class radiography classification, focusing specifically on tube placement assessment and related findings, with comparison to the end-to-end training of an established convolutional neural network. A dataset comprising 8842 radiographs classified into seven distinct categories was employed to extract embeddings using seven foundation models: DenseNet121, BiomedCLIP, Med-Flamingo, MedImageInsight, MedSigLIP, Rad-DINO, and CXR-Foundation. Adapter models were subsequently trained using classical machine learning algorithms, including K-nearest neighbors (KNN), logistic regression (LR), support vector machines (SVM), random forest (RF), and multi-layer perceptron (MLP). Among these combinations, MedImageInsight embeddings paired with an SVM or MLP adapter yielded the highest mean area under the curve (mAUC) at 93.1%, followed closely by MedSigLIP with MLP (91.0%), Rad-DINO with SVM (90.7%), and CXR-Foundation with LR (88.6%), achieving a higher mAUC score than a fully finetuned convolutional neural network, DenseNet121 (87.2%). In comparison, BiomedCLIP and DenseNet121 exhibited moderate performance with SVM, obtaining mAUC scores of 82.8% and 81.1%, respectively, whereas Med-Flamingo delivered the lowest performance at 78.5% when combined with RF. Significant differences were found between each embedding model and MedImageInsight using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test at the significance level 0.05 (before Bonferroni correction). Notably, most adapter models demonstrated computational efficiency, achieving training within minutes and inference within seconds on CPU, underscoring their practicality for clinical applications. Furthermore, fairness analysis on adapters trained on MedImageInsight-derived embeddings indicated minimal disparities, with gender differences in performance within 1.8% and standard deviations across age groups not exceeding 1.4%. Further analysis indicated there is no significant difference across gender and age at a significance level of 0.05. These findings confirm that foundation model embeddings-especially those from MedImageInsight-facilitate accurate, computationally efficient, and equitable diagnostic classification using lightweight adapters for radiographic image analysis.

Indexed as

Machine LearningRadiographyClassification AlgorithmsConvolutional Neural NetworksHumansNeural Networks, ComputerAdapter trainingEmbeddingFoundation modelsRadiographic image classification

Identifiers

PMID41331658
PMCPMC13481954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.