Artificial intelligence in emergency neuroradiology: Current applications and perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• The applications of artificial intelligence in emergency neuroradiology have substantially expanded in depth and scope in the past few years. • Machine learning and deep learning algorithms are now used in several tasks related to acute ischemic stroke, acute intracranial hemorrhage, intracranial aneurysm and arteriovenous malformations. • The application of artificial intelligence in emergency neuroradiology is growing, calling for more development driven by clinical needs, attention to pediatric neuroimaging, and analysis of real-world performance. Emergency neuroradiology provides rapid diagnostic decision-making and guidance for management for a wide range of acute conditions involving the brain, head and neck, and spine. This narrative review aims at providing an up-to-date discussion about the state of the art of applications of artificial intelligence in emergency neuroradiology, which have substantially expanded in depth and scope in the past few years. A detailed analysis of machine learning and deep learning algorithms in several tasks related to acute ischemic stroke involving various imaging modalities, including a description of existing commercial products, is provided. The applications of artificial intelligence in acute intracranial hemorrhage and other vascular pathologies such as intracranial aneurysm and arteriovenous malformation are discussed. Other areas of emergency neuroradiology including infection, fracture, cord compression, and pediatric imaging are further discussed in turn. Based on these discussions, this article offers insight into practical considerations regarding the applications of artificial intelligence in emergency neuroradiology, calling for more development driven by clinical needs, attention to pediatric neuroimaging, and analysis of real-world performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".