Tessa S. Cook

Vikash Gupta, Barbaros Selnur Erdal, Carolina Ramirez et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become commonplace to solve routine everyday tasks. Because of the exponential growth in medical imaging data volume and complexity, the workload on radiologists is steadily increasing. We project that the gap between the number of imaging exams and the number of expert radiologist readers required to cover this increase will continue to expand, consequently introducing a demand for AI-based tools that improve the efficiency with which radiologists can comfortably interpret these exams. AI has been shown to improve efficiency in medical-image generation, processing, and interpretation, and a variety of such AI models have been developed across research labs worldwide. However, very few of these, if any, find their way into routine clinical use, a discrepancy that reflects the divide between AI research and successful AI translation. To address the barrier to clinical deployment, we have formed MONAI Consortium, an open-source community which is building standards for AI deployment in healthcare institutions, and developing tools and infrastructure to facilitate their implementation. This report represents several years of weekly discussions and hands-on problem solving experience by groups of industry experts and clinicians in the MONAI Consortium. We identify barriers between AI-model development in research labs and subsequent clinical deployment and propose solutions. Our report provides guidance on processes which take an imaging AI model from development to clinical implementation in a healthcare institution. We discuss various AI integration points in a clinical Radiology workflow. We also present a taxonomy of Radiology AI use-cases. Through this report, we intend to educate the stakeholders in healthcare and AI (AI researchers, radiologists, imaging informaticists, and regulators) about cross-disciplinary challenges and possible solutions.

Satvik Tripathi, Don Enwerem, Kevin Song et al.

Transparent and standardized reporting is essential for reproducible scientific research, yet adherence to reporting guidelines remains inconsistent because of the manual effort required to select and complete checklists. We present CheckSupport, an open-source, locally deployable system that uses large language models to automate the recommendation of reporting checklists and the evidence-grounded completion of checklists for scientific manuscripts. CheckSupport employs a staged prompting strategy that decomposes reporting workflows into constrained inference tasks, prioritizing faithful extraction over generative text synthesis. All inference is performed locally using instruction-tuned models, preserving data privacy and enabling reproducible, auditable workflows. Evaluated on a corpus of peer-reviewed manuscripts, CheckSupport achieved 90% overall accuracy for checklist recommendations and 88% overall accuracy for item-level completion while operating on CPU-only hardware. On average, the wall-clock time per manuscript was 12.5 seconds, including the checklist recommendation and full checklist completion. These results demonstrate that large language models, when applied as structured inference components, can reduce reporting burden and support more transparent and reproducible scientific reporting across disciplines.

M. Jorge Cardoso, Julia Moosbauer, Tessa S. Cook et al.

The integration of AI into radiology introduces opportunities for improved clinical care provision and efficiency but it demands a meticulous approach to mitigate potential risks as with any other new technology. Beginning with rigorous pre-deployment evaluation and validation, the focus should be on ensuring models meet the highest standards of safety, effectiveness and efficacy for their intended applications. Input and output guardrails implemented during production usage act as an additional layer of protection, identifying and addressing individual failures as they occur. Continuous post-deployment monitoring allows for tracking population-level performance (data drift), fairness, and value delivery over time. Scheduling reviews of post-deployment model performance and educating radiologists about new algorithmic-driven findings is critical for AI to be effective in clinical practice. Recognizing that no single AI solution can provide absolute assurance even when limited to its intended use, the synergistic application of quality assurance at multiple levels - regulatory, clinical, technical, and ethical - is emphasized. Collaborative efforts between stakeholders spanning healthcare systems, industry, academia, and government are imperative to address the multifaceted challenges involved. Trust in AI is an earned privilege, contingent on a broad set of goals, among them transparently demonstrating that the AI adheres to the same rigorous safety, effectiveness and efficacy standards as other established medical technologies. By doing so, developers can instil confidence among providers and patients alike, enabling the responsible scaling of AI and the realization of its potential benefits. The roadmap presented herein aims to expedite the achievement of deployable, reliable, and safe AI in radiology.

Yishu Wei, Adam E. Flanders, Errol Colak et al.

Multimodal large language models have demonstrated comparable performance to that of radiology trainees on multiple-choice board-style exams. However, to develop clinically useful multimodal LLM tools, high-quality benchmarks curated by domain experts are essential. To curate released and holdout datasets of 100 chest radiographic studies each and propose an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted expert labeling procedure to allow radiologists to label studies more efficiently. A total of 13,735 deidentified chest radiographs and their corresponding reports from the MIDRC were used. GPT-4o extracted abnormal findings from the reports, which were then mapped to 12 benchmark labels with a locally hosted LLM (Phi-4-Reasoning). From these studies, 1,000 were sampled on the basis of the AI-suggested benchmark labels for expert review; the sampling algorithm ensured that the selected studies were clinically relevant and captured a range of difficulty levels. Seventeen chest radiologists participated, and they marked "Agree all", "Agree mostly" or "Disagree" to indicate their assessment of the correctness of the LLM suggested labels. Each chest radiograph was evaluated by three experts. Of these, at least two radiologists selected "Agree All" for 381 radiographs. From this set, 200 were selected, prioritizing those with less common or multiple finding labels, and divided into 100 released radiographs and 100 reserved as the holdout dataset. The holdout dataset is used exclusively by RSNA to independently evaluate different models. A benchmark of 200 chest radiographic studies with 12 benchmark labels was created and made publicly available https://imaging.rsna.org, with each chest radiograph verified by three radiologists. In addition, an AI-assisted labeling procedure was developed to help radiologists label at scale, minimize unnecessary omissions, and support a semicollaborative environment.

Eva Prakash, Maayane Attias, Pierre Chambon et al.

Objective: To enhance automated de-identification of radiology reports by scaling transformer-based models through extensive training datasets and benchmarking performance against commercial cloud vendor systems for protected health information (PHI) detection. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, we built upon a state-of-the-art, transformer-based, PHI de-identification pipeline by fine-tuning on two large annotated radiology corpora from Stanford University, encompassing chest X-ray, chest CT, abdomen/pelvis CT, and brain MR reports and introducing an additional PHI category (AGE) into the architecture. Model performance was evaluated on test sets from Stanford and the University of Pennsylvania (Penn) for token-level PHI detection. We further assessed (1) the stability of synthetic PHI generation using a "hide-in-plain-sight" method and (2) performance against commercial systems. Precision, recall, and F1 scores were computed across all PHI categories. Results: Our model achieved overall F1 scores of 0.973 on the Penn dataset and 0.996 on the Stanford dataset, outperforming or maintaining the previous state-of-the-art model performance. Synthetic PHI evaluation showed consistent detectability (overall F1: 0.959 [0.958-0.960]) across 50 independently de-identified Penn datasets. Our model outperformed all vendor systems on synthetic Penn reports (overall F1: 0.960 vs. 0.632-0.754). Discussion: Large-scale, multimodal training improved cross-institutional generalization and robustness. Synthetic PHI generation preserved data utility while ensuring privacy. Conclusion: A transformer-based de-identification model trained on diverse radiology datasets outperforms prior academic and commercial systems in PHI detection and establishes a new benchmark for secure clinical text processing.