MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Artificial intelligence in nuclear cardiology: Technical perspectives, strategic directions, and recommendations from an IAEA expert working group

2025· article· en· W7117475814 on OpenAlexaff
Christiane Wiefels, Luis Eduardo Juárez-Orozco, Pietro Selemo Craviolatti, Oleksandr Diahiliev, Amir Eskander, Raffaele Giubbini, Elisa Milan, Weihua Zhou, Ganesan Karthikeyan, Amelia Jimenez-Heffernan, Amalia Peix, Angelin Apostol, Anita Brink, M. Dondi, Diana Paez

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Nuclear Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)SiemensValue (mathematics)White paperNuclear imagingQuality (philosophy)MultimodalityMedical physicistData acquisitionApplications of artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly permeating nuclear cardiology and offers the possibility to enhance diagnostic accuracy, prognostic stratification, and operational efficiency. AI is demonstrating applicability across the imaging workflow-from individualized patient selection and adaptive image reconstruction to denoising of low-dose datasets, automated attenuation and motion correction, calcium scoring, and the integration of imaging with clinical and functional variables for enhanced diagnosis and comprehensive risk assessment. But the translational trajectory of AI in nuclear cardiology is challenged by the lag in fundamental AI knowledge among researchers and clinicians, the quality of the target data regarding heterogeneity in acquisition protocols, scanner platforms, and patient populations, and by infrastructural disparities that constrain the generation of large, representative datasets needed for training and validation, particularly in low-resource settings. Additionally, necessary regulatory and legal frameworks remain in early stages of harmonization. This white paper, developed by an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) working group, provides a succinct overview of the technical basis, areas of deployment, clinical value and unmet challenges of AI in nuclear cardiology. It makes punctual suggestions to aid maturation in this area while maintaining a sober interaction with the overwhelming nature of the field. These include promoting standardized acquisition and reporting practices, establishing globally representative reference datasets, promoting imaging multimodality frameworks and developing AI-proficient clinical and technical personnel. Under these conditions, AI may meaningfully enhance the diagnostic and prognostic value of nuclear cardiology while supporting equitable implementation and preserving clinical accountability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0140.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Nuclear MedicineSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207