Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 30, 2026

Introduction of an Integrated Pathology Image Management, Artificial Intelligence, and Reporting System
Published on: July 11, 2025
Comparative accuracy of artificial intelligence versus manual interpretation in detecting pulmonary hypertension
Faizan Ahmed1, Faseeh Haider2, Ramsha Ali3
1Department of Medicine, Jersey Shore University Medical Center, Hackensack Meridian Health, Neptune, NJ, United States.
Introduction:
Pulmonary hypertension (PH) has an incidence of approximately 6 cases per million adults, with a global prevalence ranging from 49 to 55 cases per million adults. Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have demonstrated promising improvements in the diagnostic accuracy of imaging for PH, achieving an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.94, compared to seasoned professionals.
Research Objective:
To systematically synthesize available evidence on the comparative accuracy of AI versus manual interpretation in detecting PH across various chest imaging modalities, i.e., chest X-ray, echocardiography, CT scan and cardiac MRI.
Methods:
Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across five databases-PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library-from inception through March 2025. Statistical analysis was performed using R (version 2024.12.1 + 563) with 2 × 2 contingency data. Sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled using a bivariate random-effects model (reitsma() from the mada package), while the AUC were meta-analyzed using logit-transformed values via the metagen() function from the meta package.
Results:
This meta-analysis of 12 studies, encompassing 7,459 patients, demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in diagnostic accuracy of PH with AI integration, evidenced by a logit mean difference in AUC of 0.43 (95% CI: 0.23-0.64; p < 0.0001) and low heterogeneity (I 2 = 21.0%, τ 2 < 0.0001, p = 0.2090), which was consolidated by pooled AUC of 0.934 on bivariate model. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for AI models were 0.83 (95% CI: 0.73-0.90) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.86-0.95), respectively, with substantial heterogeneity for sensitivity (I 2 = 83.8%, τ 2 = 0.4934, p < 0.0001) and moderate for specificity (I 2 = 41.5%, τ 2 = 0.1015, p = 0.1146); the diagnostic odds ratio was 54.26 (95% CI: 22.50-130.87) with substantial heterogeneity (I 2 = 70.7%, τ 2 = 0.8451, p = 0.0023). Sensitivity analysis showed stable estimates and did not reduce heterogeneity across outcomes.
Conclusion:
AI-integrated imaging significantly enhances diagnostic accuracy for pulmonary hypertension, with higher sensitivity (0.83) and specificity (0.91) compared to manual interpretation across chest imaging modalities. However, further high-quality trials with externally validated cohorts may be needed to confirm these findings and reduce variability among AI models across diverse clinical settings.
Related Concept Videos
Improving Translational Accuracy
Improving Translational Accuracy
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision
Accuracy and Precision
Accuracy, limits, and approximation
Accuracy is defined as the closeness of the measured value to the true or actual value. In engineering mechanics, repeated measurements are taken during theoretical or experimental analyses to ensure that the result is precise and accurate.
The accuracy of any solution is based on the...
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...

