Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41540207›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2026

Radiologist burnout: AI's true black box.

Jay R Parikh, Frank J Lexa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jay R ParikhDivision of Diagnostic Imaging, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. JRParikh@mdanderson.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-5949-9171
Frank J LexaRadiology Leadership Institute of the American College of Radiology, Reston, VA, USA.

Funding

TRANSLATIONAL AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY COREP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI PETER W PISTERS · 1985 to 2026
$279.3M
Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute award number P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple articles have touted the longitudinal promise of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology, including projections of streamlining repetitive tasks, improving workflow, and reducing physician burnout. The purpose of this article is to review publications directly assessing the impact of AI on radiologist burnout and the impact of AI on the established drivers of radiologist burnout. Our analysis found conflicting, inconclusive limited data that AI reduces radiologist burnout, and the balance of data does not support that AI improves the drivers of burnout. How AI affects radiologist burnout remains a "black box", with the final impact yet to be determined. KEY POINTS: Question While AI has been touted to reduce radiologist burnout, the literature to date supporting this claim has not been explored. Findings Our analysis found inconclusive, limited data that AI reduces radiologist burnout, and that the balance of data does not support that AI improves the drivers of burnout. Clinical relevance Despite the optimism towards AI implementation in radiology, how AI truly affects radiologist burnout remains a "black box", with the final impact yet to be determined.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceBurnout, ProfessionalRadiologistsRadiologyHumansArtificial intelligenceBurnoutRadiologistRadiologyWellness

Identifiers

PMID41540207
PMCPMC13212816

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.