Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40770121›Full record

ReviewInsights into imaging2025

Foundation models for radiology-the position of the AI for Health Imaging (AI4HI) network.

José Guilherme de Almeida, Leonor Cerdá Alberich, Gianna Tsakou, Kostas Marias, Manolis Tsiknakis, Karim Lekadir, Luis Marti-Bonmati, Nikolaos Papanikolaou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Insights into imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

8 authors.

José Guilherme de AlmeidaChampalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal. jose.almeida@research.fchampalimaud.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1887-0157
Leonor Cerdá AlberichLa Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.
Gianna TsakouR&D Department of Maggioli SpA, Greek Branch, Athens, Greece.
Kostas MariasHellenic Mediterranean University and Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Heraklion, Greece.
Manolis TsiknakisHellenic Mediterranean University and Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Heraklion, Greece.
Karim LekadirUniversitat de Barcelona, Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Lab (BCN-AIM), Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Barcelona, Spain.
Luis Marti-BonmatiLa Fe Health Research Institute, Valencia, Spain.
Nikolaos PapanikolaouChampalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.

Funding

HORIZON EUROPE Health 952159
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foundation models are large models trained on big data which can be used for downstream tasks. In radiology, these models can potentially address several gaps in fairness and generalization, as they can be trained on massive datasets without labelled data and adapted to tasks requiring data with a small number of descriptions. This reduces one of the limiting bottlenecks in clinical model construction-data annotation-as these models can be trained through a variety of techniques that require little more than radiological images with or without their corresponding radiological reports. However, foundation models may be insufficient as they are affected-to a smaller extent when compared with traditional supervised learning approaches-by the same issues that lead to underperforming models, such as a lack of transparency/explainability, and biases. To address these issues, we advocate that the development of foundation models should not only be pursued but also accompanied by the development of a decentralized clinical validation and continuous training framework. This does not guarantee the resolution of the problems associated with foundation models, but it enables developers, clinicians and patients to know when, how and why models should be updated, creating a clinical AI ecosystem that is better capable of serving all stakeholders. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: Foundation models may mitigate issues like bias and poor generalization in radiology AI, but challenges persist. We propose a decentralized, cross-institutional framework for continuous validation and training to enhance model reliability, safety, and clinical utility. KEY POINTS: Foundation models trained on large datasets reduce annotation burdens and improve fairness and generalization in radiology. Despite improvements, they still face challenges like limited transparency, explainability, and residual biases. A decentralized, cross-institutional framework for clinical validation and continuous training can strengthen reliability and inclusivity in clinical AI.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceBiasFoundation modelsRadiology

Identifiers

PMID40770121
PMCPMC12328884

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.