Cited by 268Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationRadiology practices and educationRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Integrating artificial intelligence into the clinical practice of radiology: challenges and recommendations

Recht, Michael P., Dewey, Marc, Dreyer, Keith, Langlotz, Curtis, Niessen, Wiro, Prainsack, Barbara, Smith, John J.·2020·European Radiology

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to significantly disrupt the way radiology will be practiced in the near future, but several issues need to be resolved before AI can be widely implemented in daily practice. These include the role of the different stakeholders in the development of AI for imaging, the ethical development and use of AI in healthcare, the appropriate validation of each developed AI algorithm, the development of effective data sharing mechanisms, regulatory hurdles for the clearance of AI algorithms, and the development of AI educational resources for both practicing radiologists and radiology trainees. This paper details these issues and presents possible solutions based on discussions held at the 2019 meeting of the International Society for Strategic Studies in Radiology. KEY POINTS: • Radiologists should be aware of the different types of bias commonly encountered in AI studies, and understand their possible effects. • Methods for effective data sharing to train, validate, and test AI algorithms need to be developed. • It is essential for all radiologists to gain an understanding of the basic principles, potentials, and limits of AI.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00330-020-06672-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 38 · Cited by 268

Authors
Recht, M. P., Dewey, M., Dreyer, K., Langlotz, C., Niessen, W., Prainsack, B., & Smith, J. J.
Affiliations
  • NYU Langone Health (US)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Erasmus MC (NL)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • Hogan Lovells (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Recht, Michael P.
Venue
European Radiology
Published
2020-02-17
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
3576-3584
ISSN
  • 0938-7994 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1084
OpenAlex
W2995162454
Cited by
268
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 7
FWCI
7.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
artificial intelligence in radiology, clinical implementation of AI, AI ethics, algorithm validation, radiology education, algorithmic bias, radiology residents
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Radiologists, Deep Learning, Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Forecasting, Humans, Radiology, Reproducibility of Results, Information Dissemination, Validation Studies as Topic

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