Four modules,
explicit maturity

Technique, findings, impression and classifications assemble around the person who signs. The radiologist does not become a software operator: they keep looking at the image, saying what they see and deciding what they sign.

This architecture has a practical consequence: the 52-second median between opening the editor and signing does not come from a dangerous shortcut; it comes from clearing away everything that is not a clinical decision. The context arrives ready, the structure assembles itself, the review stays visible at all times.

Each exam carries its own log: what the AI suggested, what the physician changed, when they signed, to whom the critical finding was communicated. Templates are versioned and approved by the institution. It is the design that Resolution 2.454/2026 requires, implemented from the architecture up.

The exam arrives with context: worklist, clinical indication and priors come in from the RIS and the PACS with no manual upload. You open the editor and dictate the way you reason through the case; your speech becomes Technique, Analysis and Impression in the house template as you talk, with the terminology your institution has standardized. When a classifiable finding appears, GUIDE suggests the category with the criterion cited; when a critical finding appears, CRIT opens the communication protocol with an SLA and an audit trail.

Review is organized by fields so you can check relevant details. After signature, the report returns to your RIS in its expected format. The exam retains a record of AI suggestions, edits, signature and communication. The 52-second median measures from editor open to signature. Return to the RIS and finding communication are outside this measure.

REPORT, GUIDE, CRIT and LaudAI are not four products sold together: they are four stations on the same route. The template governed by LaudAI is what REPORT fills with your speech; the classification GUIDE suggests goes into the right field of that template; the critical finding CRIT communicates comes from the report you have just structured. Each module can come in stages during deployment, but the compound value shows up when the workflow closes.

The radiologist remains the author at every point: the AI structures and suggests, never decides. Review, editing and signature belong to the physician by architecture, in line with CFM Resolution 2.454/2026, and the per-exam log makes that authorship demonstrable in an audit.

The entry point does not have to be all four modules at the same time. A team can start with REPORT to measure time to signature, with LaudAI to govern templates, or with CRIT when critical-finding communication is the most urgent risk. The pilot sets a baseline, turns on the chosen module and compares the routine before and after with the same team and the same exam type.

The modules share context and audit trail, but adoption can be gradual. That separation makes it possible to prove value in one step without requiring a broad process change. When the operation expands, the report that started in REPORT already carries the LaudAI structure, the classification reviewed in GUIDE and, when needed, the CRIT protocol.

For the radiologist: how to dictate, review and sign without losing authorship. For clinical leadership: who governs templates, classifications and protocols. For IT: where the worklist and context come in from and where the report goes back to. For the DPO: which artifacts persist and which are discarded. If any of these answers is not clear in your scenario, there is no pilot design yet; there is only a product presentation.