ReviewJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026
Ethical Considerations in Patient Privacy and Data Handling for AI in Cardiovascular Imaging and Radiology.
Review in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Bacteriophage Science: A Comprehensive Narrative Review of Applications, Challenges, and Translational Opportunities.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Imaging: Where Do We Stand?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in membranous nephropathy: transforming clinical management toward precision medicine.Frontiers in medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into cardiovascular imaging and radiology offers the potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy, streamline workflows, and personalize patient care. However, the rapid adoption of AI has introduced complex ethical challenges, particularly concerning patient privacy, data handling, informed consent, and data ownership. This narrative review explores these issues by synthesizing literature from clinical, technical, and regulatory perspectives. We examine the tensions between data utility and data protection, the evolving role of transparency and explainable AI, and the disparities in ethical and legal frameworks across jurisdictions such as the European Union, the USA, and emerging players like China. We also highlight the vulnerabilities introduced by cloud computing, adversarial attacks, and the use of commercial datasets. Ethical frameworks and regulatory guidelines are compared, and proposed mitigation strategies such as federated learning, blockchain, and differential privacy are discussed. To ensure ethical implementation, we emphasize the need for shared accountability among clinicians, developers, healthcare institutions, and policymakers. Ultimately, the responsible development of AI in medical imaging must prioritize patient trust, fairness, and equity, underpinned by robust governance and transparent data stewardship.
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.