Discover how radiology workflow 2026 leverages AI orchestration, intelligent imaging, and cloud-native PACS to reduce turnaround times by 40-60% while improving diagnostic precision.
Radiology Workflow in 2026: AI Orchestration, Intelligent Imaging & Patient-Centric Care
At a glance
- Workforce crisis: U.S. projected shortfall of 17,000-42,000 radiologists by 2033; only 2% of UK radiology departments meet reporting requirements within contracted hours.
- AI transition: 2026 marks the shift from isolated AI pilots to embedded, everyday infrastructure with over 1,000 FDA-cleared radiology AI tools.
- Workflow orchestration: Modern platforms reduce turnaround times by 40-60% and improve radiologist productivity by 25-35%.
- Next-gen hardware: Photon-counting CT delivers 0.1 mm spatial resolution at 30-50% lower dose; helium-free 0.55T MRI enables ICU and bedside imaging.
- Pixel-to-reporting: AI bridges raw imaging data to structured reports, reducing administrative burden from 44% to under 15% of the radiologist's day.
- Eco-radiology: Circular economy principles and AI-driven energy optimization reduce imaging's carbon footprint by up to 40%.
- Digital twins: Virtual patient replicas now guide personalized therapy planning in cardiology, neuro-oncology, and interventional radiology.
Table of contents
- Introduction: The 2026 inflection point
- Clinical and technical evolution: Infrastructure as strategy
- Advanced modalities: Redefining resolution and efficiency
- Sustainability and the rise of eco-radiology
- AI frontiers: Foundation models, VLMs, and edge intelligence
- Subspecialty deep dives: Theranostics and interventional innovations
- The patient perspective: Navigating the complex search landscape
- Workforce dynamics: Burnout, education, and global coverage
- Further reading
- Conclusion
- References
Introduction: The 2026 inflection point
The medical imaging landscape in radiology workflow 2026 represents a critical inflection point where the convergence of advanced computational power, refined artificial intelligence, and a heightened focus on value-based sustainability has redefined the specialty. Moving beyond the historical focus on simple modality-based terms, the current professional and patient search environment is dominated by complex queries revolving around intelligent integration, operational efficiency, and highly specialized care pathways.
This evolution is driven by a persistent workforce shortage that has necessitated a fundamental rethinking of how radiology operates, shifting from fragmented infrastructure to unified, cloud-native platforms that dissolve operational friction. The radiology department of 2026 is no longer a collection of isolated machines and workstations; it is an orchestrated ecosystem where AI handles volume, humans provide judgment, and every scan delivers maximum clinical value.
By 2033, the United States faces a projected shortfall of 17,000-42,000 radiologists. In the United Kingdom, only 2% of radiology departments meet reporting requirements within contracted hours. These workforce constraints make intelligent automation not merely advantageous but essential for maintaining diagnostic standards and patient safety.[1]
Clinical and technical evolution: Infrastructure as strategy
The transition toward Intelligent Imaging in 2026 is characterized by the widespread adoption of AI-based workflows that have become so deeply integrated into the clinical environment that they are increasingly difficult to differentiate from standard operational procedures. Professional searches are no longer focused on whether artificial intelligence should be used, but rather on how it can be orchestrated to optimize the entire care loop from pixel to report.[2]
Cloud-native vs. cloud-hosted: Defining the modern PACS
In 2026, the distinction between cloud-hosted and cloud-native systems has become a primary driver of procurement decisions. A true cloud-native PACS is architected for distributed, elastic operation, allowing it to update continuously with zero downtime and scale automatically to meet the demands of expanding practices.[3]
| Feature | Legacy Cloud-Hosted PACS | Modern Cloud-Native PACS |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Lifted legacy infrastructure | Built for the cloud (microservices) |
| Updates | Periodic, often requiring downtime | Continuous, weekly, no downtime |
| Scalability | Manual, hardware-dependent | Automatic and elastic |
| Connectivity | Often requires VPN/dedicated installs | Secure browser-based access |
| Workforce support | Limited to specific locations | Distributed reading from any device |
Workflow orchestration: The antidote to fragmentation
Workflow orchestration has emerged as a vital solution to the acute radiologist shortage. By moving beyond simple worklists to intelligent case routing and automated task management, these platforms can reduce turnaround times by 40% to 60% while simultaneously improving productivity by 25% to 35%.[4]
Fragmentation is cited as a major driver of burnout, with radiologists frequently navigating multiple systems to interpret a single read. A 2026 study revealed that radiologists spend approximately 44% of their day on non-interpretive administrative and compliance tasks.[5]
Pixel-to-reporting: Closing the diagnostic loop
One of the most significant technological shifts in 2026 is the implementation of pixel-to-reporting technology, which creates a direct bridge between the raw imaging data and the structured radiological report.[6]
| Metric | Impact of AI-powered workflow orchestration |
|---|---|
| Turnaround time (TAT) | 40% - 60% reduction |
| Radiologist productivity | 25% - 35% increase |
| Administrative task time | 90% reduction |
| SLA compliance | Near 100% |
| Staff burnout | Significant mitigation via reduced fragmentation |
Future-proof your radiology infrastructure
SATMED Health's cloud-native platform solutions support distributed reading and AI integration from any device-built for the demands of 2026 and beyond.
Explore SATMED Health Solutions →Advanced modalities: Redefining resolution and efficiency
The photon-counting revolution: A technical deep dive
Photon-counting computed tomography (PCCT) has fundamentally altered the trajectory of CT imaging by moving away from energy-integrating detectors (EIDs). Conventional EID systems convert X-rays into visible light using a scintillator before transforming them into electrical signals, a process that inherently loses data, introduces electronic noise, and limits spatial resolution due to the physical septa required between pixels.[7]
In contrast, PCCT utilizes direct conversion semiconductors-typically cadmium telluride (CdTe) or silicon-that register each individual photon and its specific energy level as a discrete electrical pulse. The absence of a scintillator allows for much smaller pixels, which are defined electronically rather than physically, leading to ultra-high spatial resolution (as fine as 0.1 mm).
| Feature | Conventional Energy-Integrating CT | Photon-Counting CT (PCCT) |
|---|---|---|
| Detection mechanism | Indirect (X-ray to light to signal) | Direct (X-ray to electrical pulse) |
| Detection material | Scintillator + photodiode | Semiconductor (CdTe/silicon) |
| Spatial resolution | 0.5 mm - 0.6 mm | 0.1 mm - 0.2 mm |
| Electronic noise | Integrated into the final signal | Removed via energy thresholds |
| Pixel architecture | Restricted by physical septa | Defined electronically |
| Radiation dose | Standard | 30% - 50% reduction possible |
| Spectral data | Requires specific protocols (dual-energy) | Inherent to every scan |
The clinical benefits of PCCT are extensive. In cardiac imaging, it allows for clearer visualization of coronary stent struts and the detection of in-stent restenosis. For pediatric populations, PCCT can provide diagnostic-quality images with radiation dose reductions of roughly 43% to 45%.[8]
Spectral CT and the evolution of energy integration
While PCCT is the latest leap, spectral imaging remains a cornerstone of 2026 radiology. Spectral CT allows for the identification and quantification of different materials within a single scan. Unlike standard dual-energy CT, which often requires specific high-dose protocols, spectral data in PCCT is inherent to every scan, enabling techniques like material decomposition-separating iodine, calcium, and water-and K-edge imaging.
The MRI paradox: 3T precision vs. the 0.55T low-field revolution
The historical consensus that "higher Tesla is always better" has been challenged in 2026 by a "low-field revolution." While 3.0T MRI remains the gold standard for high-resolution soft tissue diagnostics-offering superior signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) and higher positive predictive value (PPV) for conditions like breast cancer-new 0.55T systems are gaining traction.[9]
| MRI field strength | Primary clinical application | Key advantages |
|---|---|---|
| 0.55T (low-field) | ICU, bedside, obesity, sustainability | Helium-free, flexible siting, low energy |
| 1.5T (mid-field) | General diagnostic, MSK, routine neuro | Widespread standard, balanced SNR/cost |
| 3.0T (high-field) | Adv. neuro, cardiac, oncologic staging | Highest resolution, superior lesion detection |
Deep learning reconstruction (DLR) has become the primary "speed" lever across all MRI field strengths. By training algorithms on high-quality datasets, DLR can reconstruct diagnostic-quality images from undersampled data, reducing scan times by as much as 50% without sacrificing resolution.[10]
Molecular imaging: Digital PET and extended field-of-view scanners
In 2026, molecular imaging has been revolutionized by Digital PET/CT and Long Axial Field-of-View (LAFOV) scanners. New LAFOV and "nearly total-body" PET systems (with axial FOVs of 106 cm to 194 cm) provide dramatically increased sensitivity, allowing for shorter scan times and significantly lower radioactive doses.
Upgrade to next-generation imaging hardware
SATMED Health provides precision contrast delivery systems compatible with PCCT, 3T MRI, and digital PET platforms for seamless clinical integration.
Explore Precision Imaging Tools →SI units of radiation measurement: A memory chain for medical physicists
As radiology workflow 2026 advances toward lower-dose, higher-resolution imaging, understanding the fundamental SI units of radiation measurement remains essential for every radiographer, medical physicist, and radiation safety officer. The following memory chain links the five core dose quantities in logical sequence.
Tissue - Energy absorbed
(Gray, Gy)
Adjust for radiation type
(Sievert, Sv)
Air - Electrical charge
(Coulomb/kg, C/kg)
Adjust for tissue sensitivity
(Sievert, Sv)
Air - Kinetic energy transferred
(Gray, Gy)
Sustainability and the rise of eco-radiology
Sustainability has shifted from a peripheral corporate social responsibility initiative to a core operational metric in 2026. The concept of eco-radiology now encompasses the entire lifecycle of equipment and supplies, driven by a growing awareness of the environmental footprint of medical imaging.
The circular economy in medical imaging
Adopting circular economy (CE) principles has become a primary strategy for reducing the ecological impact of the sector. Modular system upgrades can extend equipment life by 30% to 50%, while AI-driven imaging solutions can reduce energy consumption by up to 40%.[11]
Healthcare's impact on climate change is significant, with the sector responsible for roughly 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Diagnostic and interventional radiology are among the highest contributors due to high electricity consumption and the use of hazardous materials.
Waste management in ultrasound and interventional radiology
A surprising revelation in 2026 was research showing that for ultrasound, the primary carbon footprint is not equipment energy use, but rather the consumption of linens and disposable supplies such as gel and gloves.
| Ultrasound carbon footprint component | Contribution percentage |
|---|---|
| Linens (bed sheets, table paper) | ~35% |
| Disposable supplies (gloves, gel) | ~34% |
| Equipment production | ~7% |
| Energy consumption | ~3% |
In interventional radiology, where a single neurointerventional procedure can generate 8 kg of waste, there is a heightened focus on waste segregation and the use of multi-dose contrast vials with weight-based dosing to prevent unnecessary discard of agents.
Value-based procurement and the environmental bottom line
Value-based procurement in 2026 involves choosing vendors and products that take the long view on sustainability. While upfront costs for green technology may be higher, the long-term operational savings from reduced energy use and waste management often justify the investment.
Build a sustainable imaging practice
SATMED Health's eco-conscious contrast delivery systems and reusable consumables help reduce your department's environmental footprint without compromising clinical outcomes.
Explore Eco-Radiology Solutions →AI frontiers: Foundation models, VLMs, and edge intelligence
Volumetric foundation models: The quest for generalizable AI
Foundation models are large-scale, pretrained models capable of generalizing across diverse tasks without explicit training annotations for every pathology. In 2026, volumetric foundation models for CT, MRI, and PET are gaining traction, leveraging self-supervised learning (SSL) to extract meaningful representations from unlabeled volumetric data. These models can be fine-tuned for specific tasks using parameter-efficient adaptation, which reduces computational costs by up to 90%.[12]
Vision language models: Transforming reporting and analysis
Vision Language Models (VLMs) have become a major trend for draft report generation in 2026. These neural networks process images and text together, allowing them to classify images, draft findings, and predict disease based on natural language instructions.[13]
However, challenges remain. Demographic bias is a significant concern; state-of-the-art VLMs have been found to underdiagnose marginalized groups, such as Black female patients, at higher rates than board-certified radiologists.[14]
Demographic bias in AI models poses a real risk to equitable care. Institutions must implement continuous bias auditing, diverse training datasets, and human-in-the-loop validation before deploying VLMs for clinical reporting.[15]
Edge AI: Intelligence at the scanner level
A fundamental transformation is occurring in how AI is deployed, moving from centralized cloud systems to Edge AI resident within the scanners themselves. In 2026, organizations are shifting toward Small Language Models (SLMs) and "Micro-LLMs" that are optimized for efficient, localized tasks with reduced power requirements.
Digital twins: Virtual replicas and predictive cardiology
Digital Twins (DTs) have emerged as proactive cognitive systems that create virtual replicas of patients, organs, or biological systems. These twins incorporate multidimensional patient-specific data-including imaging (MRI, CT), ECG, hemodynamic profiles, and electronic health records-to simulate therapeutic scenarios and forecast disease trajectories.[16]
| Application domain | Clinical utility of digital twins in 2026 |
|---|---|
| Cardiology | Ablation planning for arrhythmia, risk prediction for heart failure |
| Neuro-oncology | Modeling tumor behavior and optimizing therapies |
| Skull-base surgery | Real-time high-precision tracking and awareness |
| Oncology trials | In silico trials tailored to individual biologic features |
Integrate AI-ready imaging consumables into your workflow
SATMED Health provides precision CT and MRI consumables designed to support high-performance AI-assisted imaging workflows across your department.
Discover AI-Ready Solutions →Subspecialty deep dives: Theranostics and interventional innovations
Targeted alpha therapy and the rise of Lead-212
Theranostics-the pairing of diagnostic imaging with targeted internal irradiation-has shed its reputation as a "last-ditch" option. This "upstream migration" is accelerated by the development of medium axial-field-of-view PET/CT scanners, which provide the sensitivity needed to detect micrometastases that standard systems miss.
A significant advancement in 2026 is the emergence of Lead-212 for SPECT imaging, which provides an ideal theranostic matched pair for patient selection and dosimetry. Lead-212's 10.6-hour half-life offers favorable dosimetric properties, and its generator-based production allows for decentralized, on-demand availability.[17]
| Target molecule | Clinical indication | Radionuclide pairing |
|---|---|---|
| PSMA | Prostate cancer (mCRPC) | 203Pb (Diag) / 212Pb (Ther) |
| SSTR | Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) | 203Pb (Diag) / 212Pb (Ther) |
| FAP | Various solid tumors | 203Pb (Diag) / 212Pb (Ther) |
| HER2 | Breast / gastric cancers | 203Pb (Diag) / 212Pb (Ther) |
Neuromodulation and robotics in interventional radiology
Interventional radiology is undergoing a transition toward office-based labs (OBLs) to protect revenue streams as hospital-based reimbursements decline. Technology in this space now includes real-time 3D tracking of instruments using ultrasound-embedded photoacoustic beacons, enhancing the precision of biopsies and minimally invasive therapies.
Autonomous robotic systems are also emerging as a solution to workforce shortages, capable of acquiring standardized diagnostic views with minimal on-site expertise, serving as a force multiplier in rural settings.[18]
Advance your interventional radiology practice
From precision biopsy guidance to theranostic delivery systems, SATMED Health supports the full spectrum of modern interventional radiology workflows.
Explore Interventional Solutions →The patient perspective: Navigating the complex search landscape
Patient behavior in 2026 is characterized by a demand for logistical clarity and specific information. Search queries have moved away from "what is an MRI" to "can I eat before an MRI?" and "same-day radiology appointments near me."
Logistical clarity and the demand for same-day accessibility
Patients are increasingly seeking comparisons between technologies, such as "3T vs 1.5T MRI" or "lowest radiation CT scan." For the aging population-projected to be 20% of Americans by 2030-there is a trend toward specialized "imaging panels" that combine bone density, cardiac calcium scoring, and brain volumetric scans into a single routine evaluation.
Safety queries: Contrast, gadolinium, and radiation dose
Clinical accuracy remains a high-ranking "evergreen" search topic. Both clinicians and patients are concerned with long-term effects, frequently searching for "contrast media safety," "gadolinium retention," and "lowest radiation CT scan."
| Patient safety concern | Mitigation strategy in 2026 |
|---|---|
| Gadolinium retention | Low-dose or contrast-free "synthetic MRI" protocols |
| Radiation exposure | Photon-counting CT and ultra-low dose CT protocols |
| Anxiety/claustrophobia | Wide-bore (XL) magnets and calming ambient environments |
| Metal implant safety | AI-driven artifact reduction and improved screening protocols |
Workforce dynamics: Burnout, education, and global coverage
The radiologic technologist education crisis
Data from 2026 reveals a concerning trend in the educational pipeline for imaging professionals. While enrollment in nuclear medicine and MRI programs has seen growth, radiography and radiation therapy have experienced significant declines.
| Educational program | 2025/2026 enrollment change |
|---|---|
| Radiography | -1.4% |
| Radiation therapy | -16.0% |
| Sonography | Stable / flat |
| Nuclear medicine | +13.0% |
| MRI | +26.0% |
Teleradiology and the nighthawk professional model
Teleradiology has evolved into a vital structural component of the healthcare system. Modern "Nighthawk" services utilize a "follow the sun" approach, employing a global pool of subspecialty experts to provide 24/7 coverage. This ensures that emergency studies, such as stroke protocols, can be interpreted in under 20 minutes.[19]
Departments implementing AI workflow orchestration alongside teleradiology coverage report the highest gains in both turnaround time and radiologist satisfaction. The combination of intelligent routing and global expertise creates a resilient, scalable diagnostic network.[20]
Further reading
- Radiology Workflow Optimization 2026: Solving Staff Shortages with AI & Agentic Systems - Deep dive into how AI and agentic systems are solving radiology staff shortages through workflow orchestration, intelligent triage, and automation strategies.
- 5 Trends Redefining RVU Productivity for the Next Generation - Analysis of 2026 Medicare reimbursement changes, RVU efficiency adjustments, and how AI workflow optimization impacts radiologist compensation models.
- Scaling Radiology AI 2026: Moving from Pilot Projects to Core Infrastructure - Strategic guide for health systems transitioning from fragmented AI pilots to unified, enterprise-grade AI infrastructure embedded in daily radiology workflows.
- Critical Non-Contrast Brain CT Parameters Every Radiographer Must Master - Evidence-based NCCT brain protocol with AI stroke triage integration, DLR optimization, and photon-counting CT considerations.
- LI-RADS v2018 & 2026 HCC Diagnostic Criteria - Multi-modal imaging strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma with AI detection, precision contrast delivery, and structured reporting integration.
Conclusion: Sustaining the future of medical imaging
The state of radiology in 2026 is defined by the necessity of "doing more with less." While technology has provided significant productivity multipliers through AI and automated workflows, the underlying workforce shortage remains acute. The most successful facilities have adopted unified, cloud-native platforms that dissolve operational friction and prioritize both patient experience and clinician well-being.
The paradigm shift toward Intelligent Imaging, specialized subspecialty care like theranostics, and value-based sustainability represents a fundamental rethinking of medical imaging's role in the care pathway. Radiology is no longer just a supportive diagnostic tool; it is a central engine of precision medicine, utilizing digital twins and alpha-emitting radionuclides to tailor treatment at an individual level.
As the specialty moves forward, maintaining high standards of clinical authority and E-E-A-T will be essential to ensuring that the next generation of technological advancements translates into equitable and effective patient care. The radiology department of 2026 is not one that replaces radiologists with algorithms, but one that pairs human expertise with intelligent infrastructure to do more with less-and to do it better than ever before.
References
- Goh, C. X. Y., & Ho, F. C. H. (2023). The growing problem of radiologist shortages: Perspectives from Singapore. Korean Journal of Radiology, 24, 1176-1178. https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2023.0845
- Ranschaert, E., Topff, L., & Pianykh, O. (2021). Optimization of radiology workflow with artificial intelligence. Radiologic Clinics of North America, 59(5), 955-966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2021.05.001
- Perez-Sanpablo, A. I., Quinzanos-Fresnedo, J., Gutierrez-Martinez, J., Lozano-Rodriguez, I. G., & Roldan-Valadez, E. (2025). Transforming medical imaging: The role of artificial intelligence integration in PACS for enhanced diagnostic accuracy and workflow efficiency. Current Medical Imaging. https://doi.org/10.2174/0115734056370620250403030638
- Wenderott, K., Krups, J., Zaruchas, F., & Weigl, M. (2024). Effects of artificial intelligence implementation on efficiency in medical imaging-A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. npj Digital Medicine, 7, 265. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-024-01248-9
- Liu, H., Ding, N., Li, X., Chen, Y., Sun, H., Huang, Y., Liu, C., Ye, P., Jin, Z., Bao, H., et al. (2024). Artificial intelligence and radiologist burnout. JAMA Network Open, 7(4), e2448714. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.48714
- Jorg, T., Halfmann, M. C., Stoehr, F., Arnhold, G., Theobald, A., Mildenberger, P., & Muller, L. (2024). A novel reporting workflow for automated integration of artificial intelligence results into structured radiology reports. Insights into Imaging, 15(1), 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-024-01660-5
- Brady, A. P. (2023). Implementation of AI image reconstruction in CT-how is it validated and what dose reductions can be achieved. British Journal of Radiology, 96(1150), 20220915. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20220915
- Melazzini, L., Bortolotto, C., Brizzi, L., Achilli, M., Basla, N., D'Onorio De Meo, A., Gerbasi, A., Bottinelli, O. M., Bellazzi, R., & Preda, L. (2025). AI for image quality and patient safety in CT and MRI. European Radiology Experimental, 9(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41747-025-00562-5
- Foti, G., & Longo, C. (2024). Deep learning and AI in reducing magnetic resonance imaging scanning time: Advantages and pitfalls in clinical practice. Polish Journal of Radiology, 13(89), e443-e451. https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr/192822
- Yang, A., Finkelstein, M., Koo, C., & Doshi, A. H. (2024). Impact of deep learning image reconstruction methods on MRI throughput. Radiology: Artificial Intelligence, 6(3), e230181. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.230181
- Buijs, E., Maggioni, E., Mazziotta, F., Lega, F., & Carrafiello, G. (2024). Clinical impact of AI in radiology department management: A systematic review. Radiologia Medica, 129, 1656-1666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-024-01921-5
- Paschali, M., Chen, Z., Blankemeier, L., Varma, M., Youssef, A., Bluethgen, C., Langlotz, C. P., Gatidis, S., & Chaudhari, A. (2025). Foundation models in radiology: What, how, why, and why not. Radiology, 314, e240597. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.240597
- Nakaura, T., Yoshida, N., Kobayashi, N., Shiraishi, K., Nagayama, Y., Uetani, H., Kidoh, M., Hokamura, M., Funama, Y., & Hirai, T. (2024). Preliminary assessment of automated radiology report generation with generative pre-trained transformers: Comparing results to radiologist-generated reports. Japanese Journal of Radiology, 42, 190-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-023-01489-5
- Panch, T., Mattie, H., & Atun, R. (2019). Artificial intelligence and algorithmic bias: Implications for health systems. Journal of Global Health, 9, 010318. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.09.010318
- Varoquaux, G., & Cheplygina, V. (2022). Machine learning for medical imaging: Methodological failures and recommendations for the future. npj Digital Medicine, 5, 48. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00592-y
- Mastrodicasa, D., van Assen, M., Huisman, M., Leiner, T., Williamson, E. E., Nicol, E. D., Allen, B. D., Saba, L., Vliegenthart, R., & Hanneman, K. (2025). Use of AI in cardiac CT and MRI: A scientific statement from the ESCR, EuSoMII, NASCI, SCCT, SCMR, SIIM, and RSNA. Radiology, 314, e240516. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.240516
- Lastrucci, A., Iosca, N., Wandael, Y., Barra, A., Lepri, G., Forini, N., Ricci, R., Miele, V., & Giansanti, D. (2025). AI and interventional radiology: A narrative review of reviews on opportunities, challenges, and future directions. Diagnostics, 15(7), 893. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics15070893
- Kocak, B., & Mese, I. (2025). AI agents in radiology: Toward autonomous and adaptive intelligence. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. https://doi.org/10.4274/dir.2025.253470
- Kapoor, N., Lacson, R., & Khorasani, R. (2020). Workflow applications of artificial intelligence in radiology and an overview of available tools. Journal of the American College of Radiology, 17(11), 1363-1370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2020.06.004
- Tejani, A. S., Cook, T. S., Hussain, M., Sippel Schmidt, T., & O'Donnell, K. P. (2024). Integrating and adopting AI in the radiology workflow: A primer for standards and Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) profiles. Radiology, 311(2), e232653. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.232653
- Brady, A. P., Allen, B., Chong, J., Kotter, E., Kottler, N., Mongan, J., Oakden-Rayner, L., Pinto dos Santos, D., Tang, A., Wald, C., et al. (2024). Developing, purchasing, implementing and monitoring AI tools in radiology: Practical considerations. A multi-society statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR & RSNA. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology, 68(1), 7-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9485.2024.03689.x
- Dikici, E., Bigelow, M., Prevedello, L. M., White, R. D., & Erdal, B. S. (2020). Integrating AI into radiology workflow: Levels of research, production, and feedback maturity. Journal of Medical Imaging, 7(1), 016502. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.7.1.016502
- Korfiatis, P., Kline, T. L., Meyer, H. M., Khalid, S., Leiner, T., Loufek, B. T., Blezek, D., Vidal, D. E., Hartman, R. P., Joppa, L. J., et al. (2025). Implementing artificial intelligence algorithms in the radiology workflow: Challenges and considerations. Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Digital Health, 3, 100188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpi.2025.100188
- Wiggins, W. F., Magudia, K., Schmidt, T. M. S., O'Connor, S. D., Carr, C. D., Kohli, M. D., & Andriole, K. P. (2021). Imaging AI in practice: A demonstration of future workflow using integration standards. Radiology: Artificial Intelligence, 3(3), e210152. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.2021210152
- Kelly, B. S., Judge, C., Bollard, S. M., Clifford, S. M., Healy, G. M., Aziz, A., Mathur, P., Islam, S., Yeom, K. W., Lawlor, A., et al. (2022). Radiology artificial intelligence: A systematic review and evaluation of methods (RAISE). European Radiology, 32, 7998-8007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-08784-9
- Khalifa, M., & Albadawy, M. (2024). AI in diagnostic imaging: Revolutionising accuracy and efficiency. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine Update, 5, 100146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpbup.2024.100146
- Leiner, T., Bennink, E., Mol, C. P., Kuijf, H. J., & Veldhuis, W. B. (2021). Bringing AI to the clinic: Blueprint for a vendor-neutral AI deployment infrastructure. Insights into Imaging, 12, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00957-y
- O'Neill, T. J., Xi, Y., Stehel, E., Browning, T., Ng, Y. S., Baker, C., & Peshock, R. M. (2020). Active reprioritization of the reading worklist using artificial intelligence has a beneficial effect on the turnaround time for interpretation of head CT with intracranial hemorrhage. Radiology: Artificial Intelligence, 3(1), e200024. https://doi.org/10.1148/ryai.2020200024
- Lawrence, R., Dodsworth, E., Massou, E., Sherlaw-Johnson, C., Ramsay, A., Walton, H., O'Regan, T., Gleeson, F., Crellin, N., Herbert, K., Ng, P. L., Elphinstone, H., Mehta, R., Lloyd, J., Halliday, A., Morris, S., & Fulop, N. (2025). Artificial intelligence for diagnostics in radiology practice: A rapid systematic scoping review. eClinicalMedicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103228
- He, J., Baxter, S. L., Xu, J., Xu, J., Zhou, X., & Zhang, K. (2019). The practical implementation of artificial intelligence technologies in medicine. Nature Medicine, 25, 30-36. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0307-9
