ReviewQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
A narrative review of foundation models for medical image segmentation: zero-shot performance evaluation on diverse modalities.
Review in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A two-stage foundation model for bladder tumor segmentation: An international multi-site studyEuropean journal of radiology artificial intelligence · 2026Article
- Application of artificial intelligence in paediatric oncology imaging.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Universal and transferable attacks on pathology foundation models using microscopic perturbations.Light, science & applications · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Current Applications, Clinical Performance, and Barriers to Implementation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Assessing the Diagnostic Accuracy of BiomedCLIP for Detecting Contrast Use and Esophageal Strictures in Pediatric Radiography.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Structure-aware multi-task learning with domain generalization for robust vertebrae analysis in spinal CT.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- AI-driven radiogenomics in gynecologic oncology: from radiological digital biopsy to a new paradigm in precision therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Agentic artificial intelligence in radiology workflow: from image interpretation to report quality control.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Applications, image analysis, and interpretation of computer vision in medical imaging.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Foundation models are deep learning models pretrained on extensive datasets, equipped with the ability to adapt to a variety of downstream tasks. Recently, they have gained prominence across various domains, including medical imaging. These models exhibit remarkable contextual understanding and generalization capabilities, spurring active research in healthcare to develop versatile artificial intelligence solutions for real-world clinical environments. Inspired by this, this study offers a comprehensive review of foundation models in medical image segmentation (MIS), evaluates their zero-shot performance on diverse datasets, and assesses their practical applicability in clinical settings. Methods: A total of 63 studies on foundation models for MIS were systematically reviewed, utilizing platforms such as arXiv, ResearchGate, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, and PubMed. Additionally, we curated 31 unseen medical image datasets from The Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA), Kaggle, Zenodo, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) DataPort, and Grand Challenge to evaluate the zero-shot performance of six foundation models. Performance analysis was conducted from various perspectives, including modality and anatomical structure. Key Content and Findings: Foundation models were categorized based on a taxonomy that incorporates criteria such as data dimensions, modality coverage, prompt type, and training strategy. Furthermore, the zero-shot evaluation revealed key insights into their strengths and limitations across diverse imaging modalities. This analysis underscores the potential of these models in MIS while highlighting areas for improvement to optimize real-world applications. Conclusions: Our findings provide a valuable resource for understanding the role of foundation models in MIS. By identifying their capabilities and limitations, this review lays the groundwork for advancing their practical deployment in clinical environments, supporting further innovation in medical image analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.