Scan a site

Radiopaedia (radiopaedia.org) is ranked in the top 10,000 sites and was registered in 2007. It is built with Ruby on Rails and jQuery; we found no traces of an AI site builder.

Popularity

Website Traffic Checker

Among the top 10K sites.

A popularity band, not a visit count.

Tranco: #15,223 · Chrome UX Report: Top 10,000 · Majestic Million: #12,963

Each list, with its date
SourceSaysAs of
TrancoA research ranking that combines several traffic and link sources, published daily.#15,223list of 27 Oct 2026
Chrome UX ReportRank buckets from Google’s real Chrome traffic, published monthly.Top 10,000Sep 2026
Majestic MillionRanks sites by how many separate networks link to them (links, not visits), published daily. CC BY 3.0#12,963list of 28 Oct 2026
Was this answer right?

Technology

Tech Stack Checker

Built with Ruby on Rails, jQuery and jQuery Migrate.

  • Ruby on RailsFrameworkShow evidenceHide evidence
    Evidence · page source, line 61
    <meta name="csrf-param" content="authenticity_token">
    Popular sites using Ruby on Rails Is this wrong? Report it
  • jQueryJavaScript libraryShow evidenceHide evidence
    Evidence · page source, line 1046
    <script src="https://prod-assets-static.radiopaedia.org/assets/fallbacks/jquery.min-9cb0f463f19758437948bdeafd5559f116fd214dc058534e18831475361eb4ca.js">
    Popular sites using jQuery Is this wrong? Report it
  • jQuery MigrateJavaScript libraryShow evidenceHide evidence
    Evidence · page source, line 1047
    <script src="https://prod-assets-static.radiopaedia.org/assets/fallbacks/jquery-migrate.min-24ae83f45c1c6453582014fe37938cdb99db63eeadab1248d61c94b33391b578.js">
    Popular sites using jQuery Migrate Is this wrong? Report it
Everything else it uses (7)

Around it: CDN, DNS, Email, Marketing and more.

Was this answer right?

Trust signals

Website Trust Checker

4 of 7 trust signals found on the home page.

Signals, not a judgement: missing details are common on small, honest sites.

  • Domain registered11 Jan 2007, 19 years agoNoted
  • HTTPSLoads over HTTPS with a valid certificateFound
  • Contact detailsNo email or phone on the home pageNot found
  • Privacy policyLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • TermsLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • Security filterNot blocked by Cloudflare’s security filter and Quad9’s security filterNoted
Every signal we looked at

On the site

  • Contact pageLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • About pageLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • Privacy policyLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • TermsLinked from the home page, and the page opensFound
  • Refund or returns policyNo link found on the home pageNot found
  • Contact detailsNo email or phone on the home pageNot found
  • Company detailsNo company name or address foundNot found
  • Payment providersNone on the home pageNoted
  • TrackersNone found on the home pageNoted

Behind the site

  • Security filterNot blocked by Cloudflare’s security filter and Quad9’s security filterNotedCloudflare’s security filter and Quad9’s security filter
  • Domain registered11 Jan 2007, 19 years agoNoteddomain registry
  • HTTPSLoads over HTTPS with a valid certificateFound
  • Protective settings2 of 6 in placePartly
  • Email protectionProtected against forged emailFoundDNS records

A second opinion on its security setup: Mozilla’s HTTP Observatory grades the site when you open it. Ten checks before you buy · A signal looks wrong? Report it

Was this answer right?

What it is

Website Summary

It calls itself “Radiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resource”.

In its own wordsRadiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resourceRadiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resource.

The page doesn’t show enough to say what kind of site it is (a shop, a blog, an app…).

Who is behind it

  • copyright lineRadiopaedia.org
  • WikidataRadiopaedia

Confirmed by 2 independent sources: copyright line and Wikidata.

Show evidence (2)Hide evidence
Exhibit 1 · page source, line 1040
© 2005 – 2026 Radiopaedia.org
Exhibit 2 · Wikidata
Q7281302: Radiopaedia
Is this wrong? Report it

Each name is quoted from its source. A brand and the company that owns it often go by different names.

More about it: Wikidata, profiles, AI use, page facts

In Wikidata

  • Radiopaedia: collaborative wiki-based educational reference for the field of radiology · website, wiki · since 2005

Wikidata, the free knowledge base behind Wikipedia, lists this domain as the official website of this item. Volunteers write it; each item shows its sources.

AI use

  • AI training: asks Amazonbot, Applebot-Extended, Bytespider, CCBot and 11 more to stay away.
  • AI assistants: asks Google-CloudVertexBot to stay away.
  • Content signals: search=yes,ai-train=no,use=reference.
Show evidence (17)Hide evidence
Exhibit 1 · robots.txt, line 35
User-agent: Amazonbot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 2 · robots.txt, line 38
User-agent: Applebot-Extended · Disallow: /
Exhibit 3 · robots.txt, line 41
User-agent: Bytespider · Disallow: /
Exhibit 4 · robots.txt, line 44
User-agent: CCBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 5 · robots.txt, line 47
User-agent: ClaudeBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 6 · robots.txt, line 50
User-agent: Diffbot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 7 · robots.txt, line 53
User-agent: Google-Extended · Disallow: /
Exhibit 8 · robots.txt, line 56
User-agent: GPTBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 9 · robots.txt, line 59
User-agent: omgili · Disallow: /
Exhibit 10 · robots.txt, line 62
User-agent: anthropic-ai · Disallow: /
Exhibit 11 · robots.txt, line 65
User-agent: Claude-Web · Disallow: /
Exhibit 12 · robots.txt, line 68
User-agent: cohere-ai · Disallow: /
Exhibit 13 · robots.txt, line 74
User-agent: meta-externalagent · Disallow: /
Exhibit 14 · robots.txt, line 96
User-agent: Cotoyogi · Disallow: /
Exhibit 15 · robots.txt, line 99
User-agent: ICC-Crawler · Disallow: /
Exhibit 16 · robots.txt, line 90
User-agent: Google-CloudVertexBot · Disallow: /
Exhibit 17 · robots.txt, line 31
Content-Signal: search=yes,ai-train=no,use=reference
Is this wrong? Report it

What its robots.txt and robots tags ask of AI crawlers. Each crawler chooses whether to follow it.

Site name
Radiopaedia
Language
English (en-US)
What it tells search engines
None

Read from what the page says about itself; we haven’t checked whether it’s true.

Was this answer right?

Built with AI?

AI Website Detector

No AI builder traces found.

Coding tools such as Cursor leave no traces, so this doesn’t mean a person made it.

AI traces: None found

How we know

AI site builders leave traces in the sites they make. We look for the traces of 53 of them and show every match with the line it came from, so you can check it yourself.

We test this on 2,275 sites whose makers we know, and publish what we get wrong.

How we test it · Every builder we know · How to tell if a site was built with AI

Was this answer right?

AI access

AI Crawler Checker

AI can find it, but not yet read it well: it scores 62 of 100.

It keeps 16 of 51 AI crawlers out, for training and for answers: the site’s choice, never scored.

62of 100

AI readiness

Findable

Search engines may list it and crawlers may read it.

  1. Findable
  2. 3AI-friendly
  3. 4Agent-ready

To reach Readable:Title and description +8

Can AI find it?

30/32

Can AI read it?

32/58

Can agents use it?

0/10

Optional: for sites with an API or a sign-in.

Below the median of the 2,439 most visited sites we read, which is 72.

Checked 29 Oct 2026

What to fix

2 fixes, up to +20 points

  • Structured data

    Add schema.org structured data, as JSON-LD, to the home page’s HTML.

    Details

    We found: None found.

    Why it matters: Structured data tells AI tools and search engines what the site is: a company, a shop, a product.

    Prompt for your coding assistant (Claude Code, Cursor, your builder’s chat)
    Add schema.org structured data to the home page of https://radiopaedia.org as JSON-LD, in a <script type="application/ld+json"> tag in its HTML: an Organization with its name, url, logo and sameAs links to its official profiles, and a WebSite with its name and url. Add the type that fits what the site offers too, such as Product, Article or LocalBusiness. Use only facts that are true of the site.
    +12points

  • Title and descriptionIn part

    Give the home page a title and a meta description in its HTML.

    Details

    We found: A title, no description.

    Why it matters: A title and a description are the words AI tools and search engines quote first.

    Show evidenceHide evidence
    Exhibit 1 · page source, line 8
    <title>Radiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resource</title>
    Is this wrong? Report it
    Prompt for your coding assistant (Claude Code, Cursor, your builder’s chat)
    Give the home page of https://radiopaedia.org a descriptive <title> and a <meta name="description" content="…"> of about 150 characters that says what the site is and offers (we found: a title, no description). Put both in the HTML the server sends, not set later by scripts.
    +8points
Optional: 4 fixes few sites have yetup to +18 points

  • Files for AI agents

    If agents could use the site, publish what they need where they look.

    Details

    We found: None of the 8 we look for.

    Why it matters: Agents act for people: they look for these files to know what a site lets them do. Worth it only if agents can use the site.

    Prompt for your coding assistant (Claude Code, Cursor, your builder’s chat)
    If AI agents could use https://radiopaedia.org for its visitors (to search it, book, buy or sign in), publish what they need at the standard addresses, and only what the site really offers: an MCP server card at /.well-known/mcp/server-card.json if it runs an MCP server, an API catalog at /.well-known/api-catalog (RFC 9727) listing its public APIs, and OAuth protected resource metadata at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource (RFC 9728) if agents sign in.
    +10optional

  • llms.txt

    Publish a short Markdown summary of the site at /llms.txt.

    Details

    We found: None found.

    Why it matters: A short summary for AI models, at an address they can find. A proposal: few AI companies say they read it yet.

    Prompt for your coding assistant (Claude Code, Cursor, your builder’s chat)
    Create https://radiopaedia.org/llms.txt as llmstxt.org describes it: a Markdown file with an H1 naming the site, a one-paragraph summary in a blockquote, and short sections listing its most useful pages as links, each with a line on what it holds. Serve it as text/plain or text/markdown.
    +4optional

  • Markdown copy

    Answer requests for Markdown with a Markdown version of the page.

    Details

    We found: Not offered: it sends the page’s HTML.

    Why it matters: A Markdown copy gives AI tools the page’s words without the HTML around them.

    Prompt for your coding assistant (Claude Code, Cursor, your builder’s chat)
    When a request to https://radiopaedia.org asks for Markdown (its Accept header includes text/markdown), answer with a Markdown version of the page’s main content and the header Content-Type: text/markdown. Requests for HTML keep getting HTML; add Vary: Accept so caches keep the two apart.
    +2optional
Every check, with its evidence

Can AI find it?

  • robots.txtFound, 131 linesFound
  • SitemapListed in robots.txt, and it lists 26 sitemapsFound
    Show evidenceHide evidence
    Exhibit 1 · robots.txt, line 132
    Sitemap: https://radiopaedia.org/sitemap?lang=us
    Is this wrong? Report it
  • Links for AI toolsNone in the home page’s headersNot found
  • Search listingAllowed: no noindex ruleAllowed

Can AI read it?

  • Text without scripts4,844 characters before scripts runFound
    Show evidenceHide evidence
    Exhibit 1 · page text, before scripts run
    Radiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resource × About Articles Cases Courses Questions Quiz Recent Edits Supporters Log In Sign Up × Menu Search ADVERTISEMENT: Radiopaedia is…
    Is this wrong? Report it
  • Markdown copyNot offered: it sends the page’s HTMLNot found
  • llms.txtNone foundNot found
  • Title and descriptionA title, no descriptionPartly
    Show evidenceHide evidence
    Exhibit 1 · page source, line 8
    <title>Radiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resource</title>
    Is this wrong? Report it
  • Structured dataNone foundNot found

Can agents use it?

  • API catalogNone foundNot found
  • Sign-in for AI agentsNone foundNot found
  • Auth.mdNone foundNot found
  • AI catalogNone foundNot found
  • MCP serverNone foundNot found
  • Agent cardNone foundNot found
  • Agent SkillsNone foundNot found
  • Agents in DNSNone foundNot found

What it lets AI do

Not scored

Keeping AI out is the site’s choice, so it never lowers the score.

  • AI trainingOpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Apple and 2 more kept out, Meta and ByteDance partlyPartly
  • AI answers and searchGoogle kept out; the rest let inPartly
Every AI crawler, and how we checked

AI companies

  • OpenAIChatGPTTo train its modelsKept outGPTBotline 56To answer people and searchLet inOAI-SearchBotChatGPT-User
  • AnthropicClaudeTo train its modelsKept outClaudeBotline 47anthropic-ailine 62Claude-Webline 65To answer people and searchLet inClaude-SearchBotClaude-User
  • GoogleGeminiTo train its modelsKept outGoogle-Extendedline 53To answer people and searchKept outGoogle-CloudVertexBotline 90
  • PerplexityTo train its modelsNone namedTo answer people and searchLet inPerplexityBotPerplexity-User
  • MetaMeta AITo train its modelsPartlymeta-externalagentline 74, kept outFacebookBotlet inTo answer people and searchLet inmeta-externalfetchermeta-webindexer
  • AppleApple IntelligenceTo train its modelsKept outApplebot-Extendedline 38To answer people and searchNone named
  • AmazonTo train its modelsKept outAmazonbotline 35To answer people and searchLet inAmzn-SearchBotAmzn-User
  • Common Crawlopen data for trainingTo train its modelsKept outCCBotline 44To answer people and searchNone named
  • ByteDanceTo train its modelsPartlyBytespiderline 41, kept outTikTokSpiderlet inTo answer people and searchNone named
  • MistralLe ChatTo train its modelsNone namedTo answer people and searchLet inMistralAI-User

5 of the 27 other AI crawlers we know are kept out: cohere-ai, Diffbot, Omgili, ICC-Crawler and Cotoyogi.

What it tells AI crawlers

  • Content Signalssearch=yes,ai-train=no,use=referenceFound
    Show evidenceHide evidence
    Exhibit 1 · robots.txt, line 31
    Content-Signal: search=yes,ai-train=no,use=reference
    Is this wrong? Report it
  • A “noai” tagNoneNot found

Like 32% of the 1,691 popular sites whose robots.txt we read in October 2026, it keeps at least one AI training crawler out. How many websites block AI crawlers?

We read the site once, as our named bot: its robots.txt, read as crawlers read it, its home page and the files AI tools ask sites for. What we couldn’t read says so. robots.txt asks and doesn’t enforce: a firewall can treat AI crawlers differently from us.

Was this answer right?

Score breakdown

Site Score

89 of 100: strong trust signals.

How established and checkable it is; AI traces carry no weight.

89of 100
TransparencyContact, policies and about page26 / 30
Track recordHow long the domain has existed25 / 25
PopularityIts place in public rankings20 / 20
Security and setupHTTPS and standard protections11 / 15
ConsistencyName, description and what it tells search engines7 / 10
Why each part scored what it did
TransparencyContact, policies and about page26 / 30contact page linked · email and phone not both given · privacy policy linked · terms linked · no payments seen, so no refund policy needed · about page linked
Track recordHow long the domain has existed25 / 25domain registered 19 years ago
PopularityIts place in public rankings20 / 20Top 10K in a popularity list
Security and setupHTTPS and standard protections11 / 15loads over HTTPS · sends visitors to HTTPS · doesn’t insist on HTTPS · no protective settings
ConsistencyName, description and what it tells search engines7 / 10site name matches the domain · describes itself · doesn’t tell search engines what it is

A high score isn’t a promise that a business is honest. How the score works.

Was this answer right?

Domain history

Domain History

Registered in 2007.

  1. Domain registeredRDAP
  2. First certificate issuedCertificate Transparency
  3. This scanCheckAnySite

The web archive couldn’t be reached; we’ll ask it again. Why can this be empty?

Changes, earlier scans and alerts
Since our previous scan
This is our first scan of the site.
Was this answer right?

How we scanned it

Only from what anyone can see: the site’s public pages and public records.

  • Politely. Our scanner, CheckAnySiteBot, says who it is and follows the site’s robots.txt.
  • With sources. Every fact above says where it came from and when.
  • Without guessing. When we couldn’t check something, we say so.
This scan, in numbers

938 checks on 29 Oct 2026, with version 0.6.0 of our checks and version 1.1 of the score.

How we work · What each version changed · About our scanner

Quick look

Built with AI?

None foundWe found no AI builder traces.

“None found” never means “made by a person”: coding assistants leave no traces.

All the evidence →

Related

Quick look

How popular is it?

Top 10KBy the best of 3 public lists.

  • Tranco#15,223list of 27 Oct 2026
  • Chrome UX ReportTop 10,000Sep 2026
  • Majestic Million#12,963list of 28 Oct 2026

A popularity band, never a visit count.

The popularity section →

Related

Quick look

What is it built with?

Framework
Ruby on Rails
JavaScript library
jQuery, jQuery Migrate

And 7 more around it (CDN, DNS, Email, Marketing), in the section.

Each with its evidence →

Related

Quick look

Which trust signals does it show?

On the site

  • Contact pageFound
  • About pageFound
  • Privacy policyFound
  • TermsFound
  • Refund or returns policyNot found
  • Contact detailsNot found
  • Company detailsNot found
  • Payment providersNoted
  • TrackersNoted

Behind the site

  • Security filterNoted
  • Domain registeredNoted
  • HTTPSFound
  • Security headersPartly
  • Software versionsNoted
  • NetworkNoted
  • Email setupFound
  • First certificateNoted
  • DNSSECNot found
  • Certificate authoritiesNot found
  • Security contactNot found

Signals, not a judgement: missing details are common on small, honest sites.

Every signal with its source →

Related

How has it changed? →
Quick look

How does it add up?

89of 100

Strong trust signals. An open formula (v1.1): every point comes from a finding above. AI traces carry no weight.

TransparencyContact, policies and about page26 / 30
Track recordHow long the domain has existed25 / 25
PopularityIts place in public rankings20 / 20
Security and setupHTTPS and standard protections11 / 15
ConsistencyName, description and what it tells search engines7 / 10
Why each part scored what it did →

Related

Questions about radiopaedia.org

What is radiopaedia.org?

Radiopaedia describes itself: “Radiopaedia.org, the peer-reviewed collaborative radiology resource.” See the evidence

How old is radiopaedia.org?

Its domain was registered on 11 Jan 2007, 19 years ago. See the evidence

What is radiopaedia.org built with?

It is built with Ruby on Rails and jQuery; we found 10 technologies in all. See the evidence

How popular is radiopaedia.org?

It is among the top 10,000 sites, by Tranco, Chrome UX Report and Majestic Million. See the evidence

Was radiopaedia.org made with AI?

We found no traces of an AI site builder. That doesn’t prove a person built it: AI coding assistants leave no traces. See the evidence

Who is behind radiopaedia.org?

Radiopaedia.org, named by its copyright line and Wikidata. See the evidence

More sites near it in popularity

Automated findings from the site’s public home page and public records, as of 29 Oct 2026. They describe what we found, not the people or business behind the site, and they may be incomplete or out of date. This is information, not advice. Terms · Report an error

What this scan can’t tell you
  • Whether the business is real, honest or delivers what it sells.
  • Whether a site was made with AI when no traces were left: coding assistants and hand edits leave none.
  • How many people visit: we show popularity bands from public lists, not visits.
  • Anything beyond the home page as it was at the time of the scan.

Is this your site? Ask for a correction.

Share this result

Share radiopaedia.org

The result describes what we found on 29 Oct 2026, with evidence.

Side by side

Compare with another site

AI traces, popularity, trust signals and the score, side by side.

Free scan · no sign-up

What do you want to find out?

Or check one thing:

Trywikipedia.orgstripe.combbc.co.uk

One scan answers everything: AI traces, popularity, technology, trust signals, how the site describes itself, a score and its history. A quick check only decides which answer comes first. We read public pages as CheckAnySiteBot and follow robots.txt.