ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
AI for screening in healthcare: promise and challenges.
Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Use of Computer Vision with Conventional Video Recordings of Gait in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping population screening, yet the translation from laboratory performance to population benefit remains limited. This narrative review describes current uses of AI across major screening pathways. Prospective trials in mammography demonstrate non‑inferior cancer detection with large reductions in radiologist workload. In diabetic retinopathy, the first FDA‑authorized autonomous system extends specialist‑level screening into primary care and improves uptake. During colonoscopy, real‑time computer vision improves adenoma detection without increasing removal of non‑neoplastic tissue. Emerging multimodal approaches, including transformer‑based and large language model-enabled systems, integrate images, clinical variables, and molecular signals and underpin multi‑cancer early detection tests. Despite these gains, three constraints currently limit impact: the base‑rate problem in low‑prevalence cohorts, which magnifies the burden of false positives; limited generalizability and potential bias across institutions and populations; and practical barriers in workflow, regulation, and trust. Opportunities ahead include foundation models pre‑trained on diverse data, uncertainty‑aware "decision referral," federated learning, larger representative datasets, and prospective trials that track interval cancers, stage shift, and cost‑effectiveness. The overarching conclusion is cautious optimism: when validated and invisibly integrated, AI augments physicians, expands access, and improves efficiency; realizing durable public‑health benefits will depend on equity‑focused design, rigorous evaluation, and sustained human oversight.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41524988What 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.