The increasing integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into health and biomedical systems necessitates robust frameworks for transparency, accountability, and ethical compliance. Existing frameworks often rely on human-readable, manual documentation which limits scalability, comparability, and machine interpretability across projects and platforms. They also fail to provide a unique, verifiable identity for AI models to ensure their provenance and authenticity across systems and use cases, limiting reproducibility and stakeholder trust. This paper introduces the concept of the AI Model Passport, a structured and standardized documentation framework that acts as a digital identity and verification tool for AI models. It captures essential metadata to uniquely identify, verify, trace and monitor AI models across their lifecycle - from data acquisition and preprocessing to model design, development and deployment. In addition, an implementation of this framework is presented through AIPassport, an MLOps tool developed within the ProCAncer-I EU project for medical imaging applications. AIPassport automates metadata collection, ensures proper versioning, decouples results from source scripts, and integrates with various development environments. Its effectiveness is showcased through a lesion segmentation use case using data from the ProCAncer-I dataset, illustrating how the AI Model Passport enhances transparency, reproducibility, and regulatory readiness while reducing manual effort. This approach aims to set a new standard for fostering trust and accountability in AI-driven healthcare solutions, aspiring to serve as the basis for developing transparent and regulation compliant AI systems across domains.

Following the successful paradigm shift of large language models, leveraging pre-training on a massive corpus of data and fine-tuning on different downstream tasks, generalist models have made their foray into computer vision. The introduction of Segment Anything Model (SAM) set a milestone on segmentation of natural images, inspiring the design of a multitude of architectures for medical image segmentation. In this survey we offer a comprehensive and in-depth investigation on generalist models for medical image segmentation. We start with an introduction on the fundamentals concepts underpinning their development. Then, we provide a taxonomy on the different declinations of SAM in terms of zero-shot, few-shot, fine-tuning, adapters, on the recent SAM 2, on other innovative models trained on images alone, and others trained on both text and images. We thoroughly analyze their performances at the level of both primary research and best-in-literature, followed by a rigorous comparison with the state-of-the-art task-specific models. We emphasize the need to address challenges in terms of compliance with regulatory frameworks, privacy and security laws, budget, and trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI). Finally, we share our perspective on future directions concerning synthetic data, early fusion, lessons learnt from generalist models in natural language processing, agentic AI and physical AI, and clinical translation.

The automated generation of radiology reports from chest X-ray images holds significant promise in enhancing diagnostic workflows while preserving patient privacy. Traditional centralized approaches often require sensitive data transfer, posing privacy concerns. To address this, the study proposes a Multimodal Federated Learning framework for chest X-ray report generation using the IU-Xray dataset. The system utilizes a Vision Transformer (ViT) as the encoder and GPT-2 as the report generator, enabling decentralized training without sharing raw data. Three Federated Learning (FL) aggregation strategies: FedAvg, Krum Aggregation and a novel Loss-aware Federated Averaging (L-FedAvg) were evaluated. Among these, Krum Aggregation demonstrated superior performance across lexical and semantic evaluation metrics such as ROUGE, BLEU, BERTScore and RaTEScore. The results show that FL can match or surpass centralized models in generating clinically relevant and semantically rich radiology reports. This lightweight and privacy-preserving framework paves the way for collaborative medical AI development without compromising data confidentiality.

This study explores the use of Federated Learning (FL) for tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis using chest X-rays in low-resource settings across Africa. FL allows hospitals to collaboratively train AI models without sharing raw patient data, addressing privacy concerns and data scarcity that hinder traditional centralized models. The research involved hospitals and research centers in eight African countries. Most sites used local datasets, while Ghana and The Gambia used public ones. The study compared locally trained models with a federated model built across all institutions to evaluate FL's real-world feasibility. Despite its promise, implementing FL in sub-Saharan Africa faces challenges such as poor infrastructure, unreliable internet, limited digital literacy, and weak AI regulations. Some institutions were also reluctant to share model updates due to data control concerns. In conclusion, FL shows strong potential for enabling AI-driven healthcare in underserved regions, but broader adoption will require improvements in infrastructure, education, and regulatory support.

Multi-modal medical image fusion (MMIF) is increasingly recognized as an essential technique for enhancing diagnostic precision and facilitating effective clinical decision-making within computer-aided diagnosis systems. MMIF combines data from X-ray, MRI, CT, PET, SPECT, and ultrasound to create detailed, clinically useful images of patient anatomy and pathology. These integrated representations significantly advance diagnostic accuracy, lesion detection, and segmentation. This comprehensive review meticulously surveys the evolution, methodologies, algorithms, current advancements, and clinical applications of MMIF. We present a critical comparative analysis of traditional fusion approaches, including pixel-, feature-, and decision-level methods, and delves into recent advancements driven by deep learning, generative models, and transformer-based architectures. A critical comparative analysis is presented between these conventional methods and contemporary techniques, highlighting differences in robustness, computational efficiency, and interpretability. The article addresses extensive clinical applications across oncology, neurology, and cardiology, demonstrating MMIF's vital role in precision medicine through improved patient-specific therapeutic outcomes. Moreover, the review thoroughly investigates the persistent challenges affecting MMIF's broad adoption, including issues related to data privacy, heterogeneity, computational complexity, interpretability of AI-driven algorithms, and integration within clinical workflows. It also identifies significant future research avenues, such as the integration of explainable AI, adoption of privacy-preserving federated learning frameworks, development of real-time fusion systems, and standardization efforts for regulatory compliance.

Performance comparisons are fundamental in medical imaging Artificial Intelligence (AI) research, often driving claims of superiority based on relative improvements in common performance metrics. However, such claims frequently rely solely on empirical mean performance. In this paper, we investigate whether newly proposed methods genuinely outperform the state of the art by analyzing a representative cohort of medical imaging papers. We quantify the probability of false claims based on a Bayesian approach that leverages reported results alongside empirically estimated model congruence to estimate whether the relative ranking of methods is likely to have occurred by chance. According to our results, the majority (>80%) of papers claims outperformance when introducing a new method. Our analysis further revealed a high probability (>5%) of false outperformance claims in 86% of classification papers and 53% of segmentation papers. These findings highlight a critical flaw in current benchmarking practices: claims of outperformance in medical imaging AI are frequently unsubstantiated, posing a risk of misdirecting future research efforts.