MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409584267 · doi:10.1093/rap/rkae147

AI for imaging evaluation in rheumatology: applications of radiomics and computer vision—current status, future prospects and potential challenges

2025· review· en· W4409584267 on OpenAlexaff
Lina Xu, Keno K. Bressem, Lisa C. Adams, Denis Poddubnyy, Fabian Proft

Bibliographic record

VenueRheumatology Advances in Practice · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersTechnische Universität München
KeywordsMedicineRadiomicsModalitiesRheumatologyImmune statusMedical physicsMedical imagingIntensive care medicineInternal medicineRadiologyImmune systemImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflammatory rheumatic diseases, a diverse group of immune-mediated conditions, are characterized by chronic inflammation that can lead to irreversible damage to joints, bones and organs, posing a significant global health challenge. If left untreated, these conditions can severely deteriorate patients' quality of life, underscoring the importance of timely and accurate diagnosis and appropriate management. Artificial intelligence (AI), including radiomics and computer vision, presents promising advancements in improving the early diagnosis and monitoring of these diseases through the analysis of various imaging modalities such as X-rays, CT scans, MRIs and ultrasounds. This review examines the current state of AI applications in the imaging analysis of inflammatory rheumatic diseases, including RA, SpA, SS, SSc and GCA. AI has demonstrated encouraging results, achieving high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy, often on par with or exceeding expert performance. The review also highlights future opportunities for improving the diagnosis and management of rheumatic diseases, as well as the challenges associated with their clinical implementation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.390 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRheumatology Advances in PracticeSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207