Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: Summary of the Joint European and North American Multisociety Statement
Open accessAbstract
This is a condensed summary of an international multisociety statement on ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology produced by the ACR, European Society of Radiology, RSNA, Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine, European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Canadian Association of Radiologists, and American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AI has great potential to increase efficiency and accuracy throughout radiology, but it also carries inherent pitfalls and biases. Widespread use of AI-based intelligent and autonomous systems in radiology can increase the risk of systemic errors with high consequence and highlights complex ethical and societal issues. Currently, there is little experience using AI for patient care in diverse clinical settings. Extensive research is needed to understand how to best deploy AI in clinical practice. This statement highlights our consensus that ethical use of AI in radiology should promote well-being, minimize harm, and ensure that the benefits and harms are distributed among stakeholders in a just manner. We believe AI should respect human rights and freedoms, including dignity and privacy. It should be designed for maximum transparency and dependability. Ultimate responsibility and accountability for AI remains with its human designers and operators for the foreseeable future. The radiology community should start now to develop codes of ethics and practice for AI that promote any use that helps patients and the common good and should block use of radiology data and algorithms for financial gain without those two attributes. This article is a simultaneous joint publication in Radiology, Journal of the American College of Radiology, Canadian Association of Radiologists Journal, and Insights into Imaging. Published under a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Ethical concerns surround the issue of privacy.
“Ethical concerns also surround the issue of privacy 65 , 66 .”
From Introduction to artificial intelligence in ultrasound imaging in obstetrics and gynecology (2020) · cites this paper as [66]
Cites
Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning
Gilpin, L. H., Bau, D., Yuan, B. Z., Bajwa, A., Specter, M., & Kagal, L. (2018) · 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA) · doi:10.1109/dsaa.2018.00018 · Cited by 2,507 · see citing works
Machine learning for medical imaging
Erickson, B. J., Korfiatis, P., Akkus, Z., & Kline, T. L. (2017) · RadioGraphics · doi:10.1148/rg.2017160130 · Cited by 1,672 · see citing works
The ethics of big data: current and foreseeable issues in biomedical contexts
Mittelstadt, B. D., & Floridi, L. (2016) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9652-2 · Cited by 714 · see citing works
Floridi, L., & Taddeo, M. (2016) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2016.0360 · Cited by 637 · see citing works
Implementing Machine Learning in Radiology Practice and Research
Kohli, M. D., Prevedello, L. M. S., Filice, R. W., & Geis, J. R. (2017) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.16.17224 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
Self-citationAdversarial Attacks Against Medical Deep Learning SystemsPreprint
Finlayson, S. G., Chung, H. W., Kohane, I. S., & Beam, A. L. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1804.05296 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
Hörnle, J. (2019) · International Journal of Law and Information Technology · doi:10.1093/ijlit/eaz002 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Kim, H., Jung, D. C., & Choi, B. W. (2019) · Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · doi:10.3348/jksr.2019.80.2.259 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Trust between physicians and patients in the e-health era
Li, Y., James, L., & McKibben, J. M. (2016) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.02.004 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Checklist for Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging (CLAIM): a guide for authors and reviewers
Mongan, J., Moy, L., & Kahn, C. E. (2020) · Radiology: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1148/ryai.2020200029 · Cited by 1,443 · see citing works
Ethical and Bias Considerations in Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning
Hanna, M. G., Pantanowitz, L., Jackson, B., Palmer, O., Visweswaran, S., Pantanowitz, J., Deebajah, M., & Rashidi, H. H. (2025) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1016/j.modpat.2024.100686 · Cited by 535 · see citing works
Ethical framework for Artificial Intelligence and Digital technologies
Ashok, M., Madan, R., Joha, A., & Sivarajah, U. (2022) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102433 · Cited by 469 · see citing works
Bluemke, D. A., Moy, L., Bredella, M. A., Ertl-Wagner, B. B., Fowler, K. J., Goh, V. J., Halpern, E. F., Hess, C. P., Schiebler, M. L., & Weiss, C. R. (2020) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2019192515 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Introduction to artificial intelligence in ultrasound imaging in obstetrics and gynecology
Drukker, L., Noble, J. A., & Papageorghiou, A. T. (2020) · Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1002/uog.22122 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence: Who is responsible for the diagnosis?
Neri, E., Coppola, F., Miele, V., Bibbolino, C., & Grassi, R. (2020) · La radiologia medica · doi:10.1007/s11547-020-01135-9 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
Ethics of using and sharing clinical imaging data for artificial intelligence: a proposed framework
Larson, D. B., Magnus, D. C., Lungren, M. P., Shah, N. H., & Langlotz, C. P. (2020) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2020192536 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Koçak, B., Ponsiglione, A., Stanzione, A., Bluethgen, C., Santinha, J., Ugga, L., Huisman, M., Klontzas, M. E., Cannella, R., & Cuocolo, R. (2024) · Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology · doi:10.4274/dir.2024.242854 · Cited by 168 · see citing works
Hickman, S. E., Baxter, G. C., & Gilbert, F. J. (2021) · British Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1038/s41416-021-01333-w · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence ethics has a black box problem
Bélisle-Pipon, J.-C., Monteferrante, E., Roy, M.-C., & Couture, V. (2023) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01380-0 · Cited by 85 · see citing works
Mastrodicasa, D., van Assen, M., Huisman, M., Leiner, T., Williamson, E. E., Nicol, E. D., Allen, B. D., Saba, L., Vliegenthart, R., & Hanneman, K. (2025) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.240516 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence for diagnostics in radiology practice: a rapid systematic scoping review
Lawrence, R., Dodsworth, E., Massou, E., Sherlaw-Johnson, C., Ramsay, A. I. G., Walton, H., O'Regan, T., Gleeson, F., Crellin, N., Herbert, K., et al. (2025) · eClinicalMedicine · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103228 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
The ethical challenges of artificial intelligence‐driven digital pathology
McKay, F., Williams, B. J., Prestwich, G., Bansal, D., Hallowell, N., & Treanor, D. (2022) · The Journal of Pathology: Clinical Research · doi:10.1002/cjp2.263 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Regulatory Issues and Challenges to Artificial Intelligence Adoption
Harvey, H. B., & Gowda, V. (2021) · Radiologic Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2021.07.007 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Weikert, T., Francone, M., Abbara, S., Baessler, B., Choi, B. W., Gutberlet, M., Hecht, E. M., Loewe, C., Mousseaux, E., Natale, L., et al. (2021) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-020-07417-0 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Anticipating artificial intelligence in mammography screening: views of Swedish breast radiologists
Högberg, C., Larsson, S., & Lång, K. (2023) · BMJ Health & Care Informatics · doi:10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100712 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
- Authors
- Geis, J. R., Brady, A. P., Wu, C. C., Spencer, J., Ranschaert, E., Jaremko, J. L., Langer, S. G., Borondy Kitts, A., Birch, J., Shields, W. F., van den Hoven van Genderen, R., Kotter, E., Wawira Gichoya, J., Cook, T. S., Morgan, M. B., Tang, A., Safdar, N. M., & Kohli, M.
- Affiliations
- American College of Radiology (US)
- The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
- Mayo Clinic (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 293
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 436-440
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2977601947
- Cited by
- 388
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2026: 62 · 2025: 74 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 10.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Radiology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Keywords
- AI ethics, clinical implementation of AI, algorithmic bias, transparency, patient privacy, human dignity, societal impact of AI
- MeSH terms
- Radiologists, Artificial Intelligence, Canada, Europe, Humans, Radiology, Societies, Medical, United States, Consensus
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
