Back to Atlas

Harrison.ai CXR

Harrison.ai

Analyzes chest X-rays for multiple suspected findings and can surface urgent cases for clinician review.

Designed for

Radiologist and clinician

Care setting

Hospital and imaging center

Specialty

Radiology, Emergency medicine

Public evidence assessedReviewed August 31, 2026

Bottom line

Harrison.ai CXR has a substantial multi-finding research base, but a broad headline result is not enough to characterize every supported finding. The most decision-relevant evidence is finding-specific, version-specific, and tied to the jurisdiction and workflow in which the product is used.

Based on public sources. RIR did not independently test this product. This is not an endorsement or recommendation.

What the evidence supports

Reviewed official materials establish a real chest X-ray analysis product used in multiple health systems.

What remains uncertain

Current-version performance by finding, population, equipment, and care setting remains outside this source-limited profile.

How it was studied

Annalise CXR, now represented as Harrison.ai CXR, has been evaluated with retrospective multicase datasets and reader studies across numerous chest X-ray findings. Regulatory availability and supported findings vary by market and version.

Intended use
Assist professional interpretation of chest radiographs and notify users of suspected findings within approved markets.
Represented version
Current marketing name for Annalise Enterprise and Annalise Container
Regulatory context
Availability and approved indications vary by jurisdiction. The current marketing name covers products previously called Annalise Enterprise and Annalise Container.
For clinical and investment reviewEvidence context and questions for deeper review

Evidence source base

Published and developer-affiliated studies plus market-specific regulatory materials. Exact product name, version, and enabled findings require confirmation.

Important limitation

Aggregate multi-finding performance can conceal weak performance on rare or high-consequence findings, and retrospective readers do not establish live workflow effects.

Questions to ask

  1. 01Which findings are authorized in the deployment jurisdiction?
  2. 02How does performance vary by finding prevalence?
  3. 03How are urgent-case thresholds configured and monitored?