Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34201827›Full record

ReviewBiomedicines2021

Towards Clinical Application of Artificial Intelligence in Ultrasound Imaging.

Masaaki Komatsu, Akira Sakai, Ai Dozen, Kanto Shozu, Suguru Yasutomi, Hidenori Machino, Ken Asada, Syuzo Kaneko, Ryuji Hamamoto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedicines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Intra- and interobserver agreement of proposed objective transvaginal ultrasound image-quality scoring system for use in artificial intelligence algorithm development.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Masaaki KomatsuCancer Translational Research Team, RIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project, 1-4-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0421-8085
Akira SakaiArtificial Intelligence Laboratory, Research Unit, Fujitsu Research, Fujitsu Ltd., 4-1-1 Kamikodanaka, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8588, Japan.
Ai DozenDivision of Medical AI Research and Development, National Cancer Center Research Institute, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6526-8812
Kanto ShozuDivision of Medical AI Research and Development, National Cancer Center Research Institute, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4476-2202
Suguru YasutomiArtificial Intelligence Laboratory, Research Unit, Fujitsu Research, Fujitsu Ltd., 4-1-1 Kamikodanaka, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8588, Japan.
Hidenori MachinoCancer Translational Research Team, RIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project, 1-4-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6843-7696
Ken AsadaCancer Translational Research Team, RIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project, 1-4-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0548-4449
Syuzo KanekoCancer Translational Research Team, RIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project, 1-4-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4558-9800
Ryuji HamamotoCancer Translational Research Team, RIKEN Center for Advanced Intelligence Project, 1-4-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-0027, Japan.

Funding

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology the subsidy for Advanced Integrated Intelligence Platform
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is being increasingly adopted in medical research and applications. Medical AI devices have continuously been approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States and the responsible institutions of other countries. Ultrasound (US) imaging is commonly used in an extensive range of medical fields. However, AI-based US imaging analysis and its clinical implementation have not progressed steadily compared to other medical imaging modalities. The characteristic issues of US imaging owing to its manual operation and acoustic shadows cause difficulties in image quality control. In this review, we would like to introduce the global trends of medical AI research in US imaging from both clinical and basic perspectives. We also discuss US image preprocessing, ingenious algorithms that are suitable for US imaging analysis, AI explainability for obtaining informed consent, the approval process of medical AI devices, and future perspectives towards the clinical application of AI-based US diagnostic support technologies.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclassificationdeep learningdetectionexplainabilitymachine learningpreprocessingsegmentationultrasound imaging

Identifiers

PMID34201827
PMCPMC8301304

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.