ArticleEuropean radiology2026
AI integration in pediatric radiology: perspectives from international academic leaders.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveArtificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into radiology, but pediatric imaging remains underrepresented in implementation studies. To assess the current status, barriers, and enablers of AI adoption in Pediatric Radiology from a global leadership perspective. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional international survey of department leaders and division chiefs from pediatric radiology centers worldwide was conducted. The questionnaire included 14 items across domains of AI deployment, enablers, barriers, ethical concerns, stakeholder involvement, and future directions. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis.
resultsEighteen institutions completed the survey (69% response rate). Sixteen centers (88.9%) reported implementing at least one AI tool, with bone age assessment remaining the most widely used application (44.4%). Other applications included image segmentation and quantification (22.2%), imaging protocol optimization (16.7%), and natural language processing (16.7%). The mean clinical impact rating was 3.56/5, with only 16.7% describing AI as "transformational." The most frequently cited barriers were lack of pediatric-specific datasets (83.3%), integration challenges (66.7%), high cost or unclear return on investment (ROI) (50%), and cybersecurity concerns (44.4%). Enablers were primarily human rather than technical, with vendor maturity and integration (72.2%) and internal champions (66.7%) most frequently highlighted. Regional variation was observed, with NLP/reporting clustered in North America and transformational impact ratings concentrated in the Asia-Pacific centers. A slim majority (55.6%) agreed that pediatric AI research currently overemphasizes model development over clinical integration, ethics, and sustainability.
conclusionGlobal pediatric radiology leaders report cautious but growing AI adoption. Addressing pediatric data scarcity, enhancing multicenter collaboration, and prioritizing clinical integration and sustainability will be essential for safe and effective deployment. KEY POINTS: Question How are leading pediatric radiology centers worldwide implementing AI, and what institutional barriers and enablers determine successful clinical integration? Findings Most centers deploy at least one AI tool, but perceived impact remains modest due to pediatric data scarcity and workflow integration challenges. Clinical relevance Addressing pediatric-specific dataset limitations through multicenter collaboration, empowering institutional AI champions, and prioritizing clinical integration over model development alone will be essential for ensuring AI benefits children as effectively as adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42401764What 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.