Artificial intelligence in radiology
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jin D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7484814 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) is here to stay and will change health care as we know it. The availability of big data and the increasing numbers of AI algorithms approved by the US Food and Drug Administration together will help in improving the quality of care for patients and in overcoming human fatigue barriers. In oncology practice, patients and providers rely on the interpretation of radiologists when making clinical decisions; however, there is considerable variability among readers, and in particular for prostate imaging. AI represents an emerging solution to this problem, for which it can provide a much-needed form of standardization. The diagnostic performance of AI alone in comparison to a combination of an AI framework and radiologist assessment for evaluation of prostate imaging has yet to be explored. Here, we compare the performance of radiologists alone versus a combination of radiologists aided by a modern computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) AI system. We show that the radiologist-CAD combination demonstrates superior sensitivity and specificity in comparison to both radiologists alone and AI alone. Our findings demonstrate that a radiologist + AI combination could perform best for detection of prostate cancer lesions. A hybrid technology-human system could leverage the benefits of AI in improving radiologist performance while also reducing physician workload, minimizing burnout, and enhancing the quality of patient care.Patient summaryOur report demonstrates the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) for improving the interpretation of prostate scans. A combination of AI and evaluation by a radiologist has the best performance in determining the severity of prostate cancer. A hybrid system that uses both AI and radiologists could maximize the quality of care for patients while reducing physician workload and burnout.
| S-EPMC9794880 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As artificial intelligence (AI) systems begin to make their way into clinical radiology practice, it is crucial to assure that they function correctly and that they gain the trust of experts. Toward this goal, approaches to make AI "interpretable" have gained attention to enhance the understanding of a machine learning algorithm, despite its complexity. This article aims to provide insights into the current state of the art of interpretability methods for radiology AI. This review discusses radiologists' opinions on the topic and suggests trends and challenges that need to be addressed to effectively streamline interpretability methods in clinical practice. Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2020 See also the commentary by Gastounioti and Kontos in this issue.
| S-EPMC7259808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesWhy is there a major gap between the promises of AI and its applications in the domain of diagnostic radiology? To answer this question, we systematically review and critically analyze the AI applications in the radiology domain.MethodsWe systematically analyzed these applications based on their focal modality and anatomic region as well as their stage of development, technical infrastructure, and approval.ResultsWe identified 269 AI applications in the diagnostic radiology domain, offered by 99 companies. We show that AI applications are primarily narrow in terms of tasks, modality, and anatomic region. A majority of the available AI functionalities focus on supporting the "perception" and "reasoning" in the radiology workflow.ConclusionsThereby, we contribute by (1) offering a systematic framework for analyzing and mapping the technological developments in the diagnostic radiology domain, (2) providing empirical evidence regarding the landscape of AI applications, and (3) offering insights into the current state of AI applications. Accordingly, we discuss the potential impacts of AI applications on the radiology work and we highlight future possibilities for developing these applications.Key points• Many AI applications are introduced to the radiology domain and their number and diversity grow very fast. • Most of the AI applications are narrow in terms of modality, body part, and pathology. • A lot of applications focus on supporting "perception" and "reasoning" tasks.
| S-EPMC7979626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim is to offer an overview of the existing training programs and critically examine them and suggest avenues for further development of AI training programs for radiologists.MethodsDeductive thematic analysis of 100 training programs offered in 2019 and 2020 (until June 30). We analyze the public data about the training programs based on their "contents," "target audience," "instructors and offering agents," and "legitimization strategies."ResultsThere are many AI training programs offered to radiologists, yet most of them (80%) are short, stand-alone sessions, which are not part of a longer-term learning trajectory. The training programs mainly (around 85%) focus on the basic concepts of AI and are offered in passive mode. Professional institutions and commercial companies are active in offering the programs (91%), though academic institutes are limitedly involved.ConclusionsThere is a need to further develop systematic training programs that are pedagogically integrated into radiology curriculum. Future training programs need to further focus on learning how to work with AI at work and be further specialized and customized to the contexts of radiology work.Key points• Most of AI training programs are short, stand-alone sessions, which focus on the basics of AI. • The content of training programs focuses on medical and technical topics; managerial, legal, and ethical topics are marginally addressed. • Professional institutions and commercial companies are active in offering AI training; academic institutes are limitedly involved.
| S-EPMC8270863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesMap the current landscape of commercially available artificial intelligence (AI) software for radiology and review the availability of their scientific evidence.MethodsWe created an online overview of CE-marked AI software products for clinical radiology based on vendor-supplied product specifications ( www.aiforradiology.com ). Characteristics such as modality, subspeciality, main task, regulatory information, deployment, and pricing model were retrieved. We conducted an extensive literature search on the available scientific evidence of these products. Articles were classified according to a hierarchical model of efficacy.ResultsThe overview included 100 CE-marked AI products from 54 different vendors. For 64/100 products, there was no peer-reviewed evidence of its efficacy. We observed a large heterogeneity in deployment methods, pricing models, and regulatory classes. The evidence of the remaining 36/100 products comprised 237 papers that predominantly (65%) focused on diagnostic accuracy (efficacy level 2). From the 100 products, 18 had evidence that regarded level 3 or higher, validating the (potential) impact on diagnostic thinking, patient outcome, or costs. Half of the available evidence (116/237) were independent and not (co-)funded or (co-)authored by the vendor.ConclusionsEven though the commercial supply of AI software in radiology already holds 100 CE-marked products, we conclude that the sector is still in its infancy. For 64/100 products, peer-reviewed evidence on its efficacy is lacking. Only 18/100 AI products have demonstrated (potential) clinical impact.Key points• Artificial intelligence in radiology is still in its infancy even though already 100 CE-marked AI products are commercially available. • Only 36 out of 100 products have peer-reviewed evidence of which most studies demonstrate lower levels of efficacy. • There is a wide variety in deployment strategies, pricing models, and CE marking class of AI products for radiology.
| S-EPMC8128724 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7547369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe objective was to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in clinical radiology in The Netherlands.Materials and methodsUsing 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.ResultsAmong 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.ConclusionIn 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.
| S-EPMC7476917 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess awareness and knowledge of Interventional Radiology (IR) in a large population of medical students in 2019. METHODS:An anonymous survey was distributed electronically to 9546 medical students from first to sixth year at three European medical schools. The survey contained 14 questions, including two general questions on diagnostic radiology (DR) and artificial intelligence (AI), and 11 on IR. Responses were analyzed for all students and compared between preclinical (PCs) (first to third year) and clinical phase (Cs) (fourth to sixth year) of medical school. Of 9546 students, 1459 students (15.3%) answered the survey. RESULTS:On DR questions, 34.8% answered that AI is a threat for radiologists (PCs: 246/725 (33.9%); Cs: 248/734 (36%)) and 91.1% thought that radiology has a future (PCs: 668/725 (92.1%); Cs: 657/734 (89.5%)). On IR questions, 80.8% (1179/1459) students had already heard of IR; 75.7% (1104/1459) stated that their knowledge of IR wasn't as good as the other specialties and 80% would like more lectures on IR. Finally, 24.2% (353/1459) indicated an interest in a career in IR with a majority of women in preclinical phase, but this trend reverses in clinical phase. CONCLUSIONS:Development of new technology supporting advances in artificial intelligence will likely continue to change the landscape of radiology; however, medical students remain confident in the need for specialty-trained human physicians in the future of radiology as a clinical practice. A large majority of medical students would like more information about IR in their medical curriculum; almost a quarter of students would be interested in a career in IR.
| S-EPMC7704872 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: There has been a recent explosion of research into the field of artificial intelligence as applied to clinical radiology with the advent of highly accurate computer vision technology. These studies, however, vary significantly in design and quality. While recent guidelines have been established to advise on ethics, data management and the potential directions of future research, systematic reviews of the entire field are lacking. We aim to investigate the use of artificial intelligence as applied to radiology, to identify the clinical questions being asked, which methodological approaches are applied to these questions and trends in use over time.Methods and analysis: We will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and by the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. We will perform a literature search through MEDLINE (Pubmed), and EMBASE, a detailed data extraction of trial characteristics and a narrative synthesis of the data. There will be no language restrictions. We will take a task-centred approach rather than focusing on modality or clinical subspecialty. Sub-group analysis will be performed by segmentation tasks, identification tasks, classification tasks, pegression/prediction tasks as well as a sub-analysis for paediatric patients.Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval will not be required for this study, as data will be obtained from publicly available clinical trials. We will disseminate our results in a peer-reviewed publication. Registration number PROSPERO: CRD42020154790.
| S-EPMC7726044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The future of radiology is disproportionately linked to the applications of artificial intelligence (AI). Recent exponential advancements in AI are already beginning to augment the clinical practice of radiology. Driven by a paucity of review articles in the area, this article aims to discuss applications of AI in non-oncologic IR across procedural planning, execution, and follow-up along with a discussion on the future directions of the field. Applications in vascular imaging, radiomics, touchless software interactions, robotics, natural language processing, post-procedural outcome prediction, device navigation, and image acquisition are included. Familiarity with AI study analysis will help open the current 'black box' of AI research and help bridge the gap between the research laboratory and clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8740955 | biostudies-literature