Canonical text (the exact bytes fingerprinted)

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-1149
version: 2
kind: revised
reason: Direction audit: the problem line stated no AI consequence and was removed. Filed as context; not counted as a gain or a problem.
timestamp: 2026-10-26T06:38:43.315952Z
status: published
lens: general
sector: health
headline: Artificial Intelligence in Cerebral Small Vessel Disease Imaging: A Study-Level Cross-Sectional Analysis of Validation Status and Clinical Applicability
dek: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) imaging, but the extent of validation and clinical applicability across the literature remains uncertain. We performed a study-level cross-sectional analysis using a frozen Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) cohort supplemented by PubMed and IEEE Xplore searches to assess database coverage and the stability of findings from the WoSCC cohort. After study-level reconciliation, 463 independent studies were included. White…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: Artificial Intelligence in Cerebral Small Vessel Disease Imaging: A Study-Level Cross-Sectional Analysis of Validation Status and Clinical Applicability: White matter hyperintensity segmentation/quantification was the most common task (196/463, 42.3%), followed by cerebral microbleed detection/classification (82/463, 17.7%), perivascular space/lacune assessment (67/463, 14.5%), CSVD burden/risk modeling (62/463, 13.4%), and clinical outcome prediction (56/463, 12.1%).
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: Artificial Intelligence in Cerebral Small Vessel Disease Imaging: A Study-Level Cross-Sectional Analysis of Validation Status and Clinical Applicability: White matter hyperintensity segmentation/quantification was the most common task (196/463, 42.3%), followed by cerebral microbleed detection/classification (82/463, 17.7%), perivascular space/lacune assessment (67/463, 14.5%), CSVD burden/risk modeling (62/463, 13.4%), and clinical outcome prediction (56/463, 12.1%).
problem_evidence: (none)
quick_read: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) imaging, but the extent of validation and clinical applicability across the literature remains uncertain. We performed a study-level cross-sectional analysis using a frozen Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) cohort supplemented by PubMed and IEEE Xplore searches to assess database coverage and the stability of findings from the WoSCC cohort.

White matter hyperintensity segmentation/quantification was the most common task (196/463, 42.3%), followed by cerebral microbleed detection/classification (82/463, 17.7%), perivascular space/lacune assessment (67/463, 14.5%), CSVD burden/risk modeling (62/463, 13.4%), and clinical outcome prediction (56/463, 12.1%). Deep learning was the largest model family (185/463, 40.0%).
limitation: 
tag: Context
key_points: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) imaging, but the extent of validation and clinical applicability across the literature remains uncertain. | We performed a study-level cross-sectional analysis using a frozen Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) cohort supplemented by PubMed and IEEE Xplore searches to assess database coverage and the stability of findings from the WoSCC cohort. | After study-level reconciliation, 463 independent studies were included.
rundown: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) imaging, but the extent of validation and clinical applicability across the literature remains uncertain. We performed a study-level cross-sectional analysis using a frozen Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) cohort supplemented by PubMed and IEEE Xplore searches to assess database coverage and the stability of findings from the WoSCC cohort.

After study-level reconciliation, 463 independent studies were included. White matter hyperintensity segmentation/quantification was the most common task (196/463, 42.3%), followed by cerebral microbleed detection/classification (82/463, 17.7%), perivascular space/lacune assessment (67/463, 14.5%), CSVD burden/risk modeling (62/463, 13.4%), and clinical outcome prediction (56/463, 12.1%).
sources:
- peer_reviewed | Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-026-02327-x | 2026-09-18
prev: 2ef54cf6b6f30e4df3ad66c3fafc69a12e461c9ab28c4225f6ecf01140f7c4ed

sha256

5924e91f7cfa773ae4804eb4d4e91ad29d2a6e4d9e57240bb5a64c6e705468a5

previous

2ef54cf6b6f30e4df3ad66c3fafc69a12e461c9ab28c4225f6ecf01140f7c4ed