Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40831572›Full record

ReviewBJR open2025

Artificial intelligence for cardiac imaging is ready for widespread clinical use: Pro Con debate AI for cardiac imaging.

Domenico Mastrodicasa, Marly van Assen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Domenico MastrodicasaDepartment of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, 98105, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8227-0757
Marly van AssenTranslational Lab for Cardiothoracic Imaging and Artificial Intelligence, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, 30322, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4044-4426

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

artificial intelligencecardiac imagingclinical implementation

Identifiers

PMID40831572
PMCPMC12360847

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.