ReviewBJR open2025
Artificial intelligence for cardiac imaging is ready for widespread clinical use: Pro Con debate AI for cardiac imaging.
Review in BJR open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Application of artificial intelligence in non-invasive cardiovascular imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- The role of artificial intelligence in early detection and risk prediction of ischemic heart disease.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has made significant strides in cardiac imaging, offering advancements in image acquisition, risk prediction, and workflow automation. However, its readiness for widespread clinical adoption remains debated. This review explores both sides of the argument across key domains. It discusses the advantages and challenges of AI for cardiac imaging regarding pre-and post-processing, risk-stratification and prognostication, workflow augmentation, regulatory and ethical frameworks, and cost-effectiveness of AI tools. It will discuss the diagnostic accuracy shown by AI for automated measurements, improved image quality and workflow efficiency with AI-driven worklist prioritization. The potential of personalized care using AI-based prognostic models. It discusses regulatory frameworks for approving AI tools, while ethical frameworks to ensure safe and ethical use of AI are being implemented, simultaneously reimbursement is becoming available, signalling growing trust in their safety and efficacy. It also addresses the challenges AI has yet to overcome, such as the lack of generalizability across diverse populations, limited availability of outcome data and cost-efficacy studies. Despite progress, regulatory and ethical frameworks still struggle to keep pace with AI's rapid evolution, raising concerns about accountability, patient safety, bias, data privacy, and algorithmic transparency.
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.