Dataset Information

Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: hindering and facilitating factors.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:The objective was to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in clinical radiology in The Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Using an embedded multiple case study, an exploratory, qualitative research design was followed. Data collection consisted of 24 semi-structured interviews from seven Dutch hospitals. The analysis of barriers and facilitators was guided by the recently published Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework for new medical technologies in healthcare organizations. RESULTS:Among the most important facilitating factors for implementation were the following: (i) pressure for cost containment in the Dutch healthcare system, (ii) high expectations of AI's potential added value, (iii) presence of hospital-wide innovation strategies, and (iv) presence of a "local champion." Among the most prominent hindering factors were the following: (i) inconsistent technical performance of AI applications, (ii) unstructured implementation processes, (iii) uncertain added value for clinical practice of AI applications, and (iv) large variance in acceptance and trust of direct (the radiologists) and indirect (the referring clinicians) adopters. CONCLUSION:In order for AI applications to contribute to the improvement of the quality and efficiency of clinical radiology, implementation processes need to be carried out in a structured manner, thereby providing evidence on the clinical added value of AI applications. KEY POINTS:• Successful implementation of AI in radiology requires collaboration between radiologists and referring clinicians. • Implementation of AI in radiology is facilitated by the presence of a local champion. • Evidence on the clinical added value of AI in radiology is needed for successful implementation.

SUBMITTER: Strohm L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7476917 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: hindering and facilitating factors.

Strohm Lea L Hehakaya Charisma C Ranschaert Erik R ER Boon Wouter P C WPC Moors Ellen H M EHM

European radiology 20200526 10

<h4>Objective</h4>The objective was to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in clinical radiology in The Netherlands.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Using an embedded multiple case study, an exploratory, qualitative research design was followed. Data collection consisted of 24 semi-structured interviews from seven Dutch hospitals. The analysis of barriers and facilitators was guided by the recently published Non-adoption, Abandonment ...[more]

PMID: 32458173

Similar Datasets

Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy. Yet people are often reluctant to trust automated systems, and some patient populations may be particularly distrusting. We sought to determine how diverse patient populations feel about the use of AI diagnostic tools, and whether framing and informing the choice affects uptake. To construct and pretest our materials, we conducted structured interviews with a diverse set of actual patients. We then conducted a pre-registered (osf.io/9y26x), randomized, blinded survey experiment in factorial design. A survey firm provided n = 2675 responses, oversampling minoritized populations. Clinical vignettes were randomly manipulated in eight variables with two levels each: disease severity (leukemia versus sleep apnea), whether AI is proven more accurate than human specialists, whether the AI clinic is personalized to the patient through listening and/or tailoring, whether the AI clinic avoids racial and/or financial biases, whether the Primary Care Physician (PCP) promises to explain and incorporate the advice, and whether the PCP nudges the patient towards AI as the established, recommended, and easy choice. Our main outcome measure was selection of AI clinic or human physician specialist clinic (binary, "AI uptake"). We found that with weighting representative to the U.S. population, respondents were almost evenly split (52.9% chose human doctor and 47.1% chose AI clinic). In unweighted experimental contrasts of respondents who met pre-registered criteria for engagement, a PCP's explanation that AI has proven superior accuracy increased uptake (OR = 1.48, CI 1.24-1.77, p < .001), as did a PCP's nudge towards AI as the established choice (OR = 1.25, CI: 1.05-1.50, p = .013), as did reassurance that the AI clinic had trained counselors to listen to the patient's unique perspectives (OR = 1.27, CI: 1.07-1.52, p = .008). Disease severity (leukemia versus sleep apnea) and other manipulations did not affect AI uptake significantly. Compared to White respondents, Black respondents selected AI less often (OR = .73, CI: .55-.96, p = .023) and Native Americans selected it more often (OR: 1.37, CI: 1.01-1.87, p = .041). Older respondents were less likely to choose AI (OR: .99, CI: .987-.999, p = .03), as were those who identified as politically conservative (OR: .65, CI: .52-.81, p < .001) or viewed religion as important (OR: .64, CI: .52-.77, p < .001). For each unit increase in education, the odds are 1.10 greater for selecting an AI provider (OR: 1.10, CI: 1.03-1.18, p = .004). While many patients appear resistant to the use of AI, accuracy information, nudges and a listening patient experience may help increase acceptance. To ensure that the benefits of AI are secured in clinical practice, future research on best methods of physician incorporation and patient decision making is required.

Project description:BackgroundCavernous hemangioma and schwannoma are tumors that both occur in the orbit. Because the treatment strategies of these two tumors are different, it is necessary to distinguish them at treatment initiation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is typically used to differentiate these two tumor types; however, they present similar features in MRI images which increases the difficulty of differential diagnosis. This study aims to devise and develop an artificial intelligence framework to improve the accuracy of clinicians' diagnoses and enable more effective treatment decisions by automatically distinguishing cavernous hemangioma from schwannoma.MethodsMaterial: As the study materials, we chose MRI images as the study materials that represented patients from diverse areas in China who had been referred to our center from more than 45 different hospitals. All images were initially acquired on films, which we scanned into digital versions and recut. Finally, 11,489 images of cavernous hemangioma (from 33 different hospitals) and 3,478 images of schwannoma (from 16 different hospitals) were collected. Labeling: All images were labeled using standard anatomical knowledge and pathological diagnosis. Training: Three types of models were trained in sequence (a total of 96 models), with each model including a specific improvement. The first two model groups were eye- and tumor-positioning models designed to reduce the identification scope, while the third model group consisted of classification models trained to make the final diagnosis.ResultsFirst, internal four-fold cross-validation processes were conducted for all the models. During the validation of the first group, the 32 eye-positioning models were able to localize the position of the eyes with an average precision of 100%. In the second group, the 28 tumor-positioning models were able to reach an average precision above 90%. Subsequently, using the third group, the accuracy of all 32 tumor classification models reached nearly 90%. Next, external validation processes of 32 tumor classification models were conducted. The results showed that the accuracy of the transverse T1-weighted contrast-enhanced sequence reached 91.13%; the accuracy of the remaining models was significantly lower compared with the ground truth.ConclusionsThe findings of this retrospective study show that an artificial intelligence framework can achieve high accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in automated differential diagnosis between cavernous hemangioma and schwannoma in a real-world setting, which can help doctors determine appropriate treatments.

Dataset Information

Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: hindering and facilitating factors.

Publications

Implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in radiology: hindering and facilitating factors.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets