Cited by 179Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationAI in cancer detectionRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Artificial intelligence in oncology: path to implementation

Open access
Chua, Isaac S., Gaziel‐Yablowitz, Michal, Korach, Zfania T., Kehl, Kenneth L., Levitan, Nathan A., Arriaga, Yull E., Jackson, Gretchen P., Bates, David W. +1 more·2021·Cancer Medicine

Abstract

In recent years, the field of artificial intelligence (AI) in oncology has grown exponentially. AI solutions have been developed to tackle a variety of cancer-related challenges. Medical institutions, hospital systems, and technology companies are developing AI tools aimed at supporting clinical decision making, increasing access to cancer care, and improving clinical efficiency while delivering safe, high-value oncology care. AI in oncology has demonstrated accurate technical performance in image analysis, predictive analytics, and precision oncology delivery. Yet, adoption of AI tools is not widespread, and the impact of AI on patient outcomes remains uncertain. Major barriers for AI implementation in oncology include biased and heterogeneous data, data management and collection burdens, a lack of standardized research reporting, insufficient clinical validation, workflow and user-design challenges, outdated regulatory and legal frameworks, and dynamic knowledge and data. Concrete actions that major stakeholders can take to overcome barriers to AI implementation in oncology include training and educating the oncology workforce in AI; standardizing data, model validation methods, and legal and safety regulations; funding and conducting future research; and developing, studying, and deploying AI tools through multidisciplinary collaboration.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cam4.3935

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clinical stakeholders expressed concerns around the relevance of the AI model's output, especially because the algorithm did not consider social determinants of health to predict risk outcomes for readmissions.

    “Baxter et al [35] and Chua et al [49] reported clinical stakeholders’ concerns around the relevance of the AI model’s output, especially because the algorithm did not consider social determinants of health to predict risk outcomes for readmissions.”

    From Barriers to and facilitators of artificial intelligence adoption in health care: scoping review (2024) · cites this paper as [49]

    The “Workflow and user-design challenges” section says clinicians must find AI recommendations relevant, and “Applications” lists rehospitalization among outcomes AI can predict. Neither passage reports clinical stakeholders expressing concern about a readmission model’s output or says that such a model omitted social determinants of health. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Ambiguity surrounding malpractice liability policy as it relates to physicians' legal responsibilities, for example, in case of diagnostic errors, remains a barrier to AI adoption.

    “In addition, ambiguity surrounding malpractice liability policy as it relates to physicians’ legal responsibilities, for example, in case of diagnostic errors, remains a barrier to AI adoption [49].”
  • Realizing AI's potential in oncology requires effective integration into clinical workflows, which presents logistical and scientific challenges.

    “Realizing the potential of AI in oncology requires effective integration into clinical workflows, which presents both logistical and scientific challenges (202).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [41]National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Improving Cancer Diagnosis and Care: Clinical Application of Computational Methods in Precision Oncology: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2019. 31386317
  2. [70]Navathe AS, Lee VS, Liao JM. How to overcome clinicians’ resistance to nudges. Harvard Business Review. 2019.
  3. [77]American Medical Association. AMA adopt policy, integrate augmented intelligence in physician training. https://www.ama‐assn.org/press‐center/press‐releases/ama‐adopt‐policy‐integrate‐augmented‐intelligence‐physician‐training. Accessed July 26, 2020.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chua, I. S., Gaziel‐Yablowitz, M., Korach, Z. T., Kehl, K. L., Levitan, N. A., Arriaga, Y. E., Jackson, G. P., Bates, D. W., & Hassett, M.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care Department of Medicine Brigham and Women's Hospital Boston MA USA
  • Harvard University (US)
  • IBM (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Chua, Isaac S.
Venue
Cancer Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-05-07
Volume
10
Issue
12
Pages
4138-4149
ISSN
2045-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3157129994
Cited by
179
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cancer Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Brigham and Women's Hospital
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
artificial intelligence in oncology, AI implementation barriers, clinical decision support, access to cancer care, clinical workflow integration, AI model validation, precision oncology, multidisciplinary collaboration
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Data Collection, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Medical Oncology, Bias, Decision Support Systems, Clinical, Precision Medicine, Research Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review