Cited by 103Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationRadiology practices and educationInnovations in Medical Education

AI-RADS: an artificial intelligence curriculum for residents

Open access
Lindqwister, Alexander L., Hassanpour, Saeed, Lewis, Petra J., Sin, Jessica M.·2021·Academic Radiology

Abstract

Rationale and objectives Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly emerged as a field poised to affect nearly every aspect of medicine, especially radiology. A PubMed search for the terms "artificial intelligence radiology" demonstrates an exponential increase in publications on this topic in recent years. Despite these impending changes, medical education designed for future radiologists have only recently begun. We present our institution's efforts to address this problem as a model for a successful introductory curriculum into artificial intelligence in radiology titled AI-RADS.Materials and methods The course was based on a sequence of foundational algorithms in AI; these algorithms were presented as logical extensions of each other and were introduced as familiar examples (spam filters, movie recommendations, etc.). Since most trainees enter residency without computational backgrounds, secondary lessons, such as pixel mathematics, were integrated in this progression. Didactic sessions were reinforced with a concurrent journal club highlighting the algorithm discussed in the previous lecture. To circumvent often intimidating technical descriptions, study guides for these papers were produced. Questionnaires were administered before and after each lecture to assess confidence in the material. Surveys were also submitted at each journal club assessing learner preparedness and appropriateness of the article.Results The course received a 9.8/10 rating from residents for overall satisfaction. With the exception of the final lecture, there were significant increases in learner confidence in reading journal articles on AI after each lecture. Residents demonstrated significant increases in perceived understanding of foundational concepts in artificial intelligence across all mastery questions for every lecture.Conclusion The success of our institution's pilot AI-RADS course demonstrates a workable model of including AI in resident education.

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 · 10.1016/j.acra.2020.09.017

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • Lindqwister et al. presented an AI curriculum for radiology residents with didactic sessions and journal clubs, aligning with our elements on AI strengths and limitations (T9) and regulatory issues (E1).

    “Lindqwister et al. presented an AI curriculum for radiology residents with didactic sessions and journal clubs, aligning with our elements on AI strengths and limitations (T9) and regulatory issues (E1) to ensure a balanced technical and ethical education19.”

    From Developing a Canadian artificial intelligence medical curriculum using a Delphi study (2024) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Introduction describes AI-RADS as a curriculum for radiology residents intended to teach the strengths and limitations of machine-learning techniques. The Abstract’s Materials and Methods and Methods > Journal Club describe didactic sessions reinforced by journal clubs. Our copy does not show that the curriculum covered regulatory issues or ethical education, so the claimed alignment with E1 is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several groups have investigated implementing ad-hoc extracurricular programs to improve AI literacy.

    “Several groups have investigated implementing ad-hoc extracurricular programs to improve AI literacy, such as the workshops led by Hu et al. and the Artificial Intelligence Curriculum for Residents (AI-RADS) program at Dartmouth [10,11].”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lindqwister, A. L., Hassanpour, S., Lewis, P. J., & Sin, J. M.
Affiliations
  • Dartmouth College (US)
  • Dartmouth–Hitchcock Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Lindqwister, Alexander L.
Venue
Academic Radiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-12
Volume
28
Issue
12
Pages
1810-1816
ISSN
1076-6332 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3093404209
Cited by
103
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 10
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Academic Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (P30CA023108)
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 › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in radiology, radiology residency education, AI curriculum, journal club, learner confidence, computational literacy, medical education
MeSH terms
Radiologists, Artificial Intelligence, Curriculum, Humans, Internship and Residency, Radiology

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