ReviewNeuroradiology2026
The impact of teleradiology: balancing clinical benefits and operational limitations.
Review in Neuroradiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis review provides a global overview of the clinical benefits and operational limitations of teleradiology. It synthesizes evidence from diverse healthcare settings and considers how teleradiology may evolve alongside ongoing digital transformation. MATERIALS AND
methodsSearch and screening were informed by PRISMA principles and covered PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from 2018 to 2025. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed articles addressing the clinical use, operations, costs, and regulation of teleradiology, with an emphasis on international perspectives.
resultsTeleradiology improves access to subspecialty expertise and enables round-the-clock coverage; reported turnaround-time reductions reached up to 89% in individual studies, though the magnitude varied substantially by setting and should not be generalized as a single effect. It may also help reduce diagnostic disparities in resource-limited settings, though this benefit depends on local staffing and infrastructure. Reported cost savings vary by model; associated environmental benefits are plausible, but the evidence does not support a single generalized estimate of emissions reduction across service models. However, important limitations persist: unreliable internet connectivity remains a substantial and unevenly distributed barrier, particularly in rural and low-resource settings; missing prior imaging and incompatible PACS systems can reduce interpretation quality and completeness; and data security breaches remain a concern. Cross-border practice also raises legal challenges, with 82% of respondents in one national survey ranking liability concerns among the top barriers to adoption.
conclusionTeleradiology has become central to contemporary radiology practice, advancing efficiency and equity in imaging access worldwide. Addressing its remaining challenges will require structured quality-assurance systems, interoperable and resilient digital infrastructure, practical regulatory evolution supporting cross-border licensing, and evidence-based integration of artificial intelligence with continued radiologist oversight.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42766033What 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.