Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: A Leadership Survey.

Elizabeth S Burnside, Thomas M Grist, Michael R Lasarev, John W Garrett, Elizabeth A Morris
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: A Leadership Survey.","authors":"Elizabeth S Burnside, Thomas M Grist, Michael R Lasarev, John W Garrett, Elizabeth A Morris","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2025.01.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Surveys to assess views about artificial intelligence (AI) of various diagnostic radiology constituencies have revealed interesting combinations of enthusiasm, caution, and implementation priorities. We surveyed academic radiology leaders about their views on AI and how they intend to approach AI implementation in their departments.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted a web survey of Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments (SCARD) members between October 5 and October 31, 2023 to solicit optimism or pessimism about AI, target use cases, planned implementation, and perceptions of their workforce. P-values are provided only for descriptive purposes and have not been adjusted for multiple testing in this exploratory research.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey was sent to the 112 SCARD members and 43 responded (38%). Chairs were optimistic, with no statistical difference between views of AI in general versus generative AI. Chairs plan to implement AI to improve quality and efficiency (43/43, 100%), burnout (41/43, 95%), healthcare costs (22/43, 51%), and equity (27/43, 63%) and most likely will target the post-processing (26/43, 60%), interpretation workflow (26/43, 60%), and image acquisition (18/43, 42%) steps in the imaging value chain. Chairs perceived that radiologists (36/43, 84%) and technologists (38/43, 88%) were not particularly worried about being displaced but saw trainees as slightly less confident (31/43, 72%). Free text responses revealed concerns about the cost of AI and emphasized trade-offs that needed to be balanced.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Radiology Chairs are optimistic about AI and poised to tackle departmental challenges. Concerns about generative AI and workforce replacement are minimal.</p>","PeriodicalId":73968,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.01.006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Surveys to assess views about artificial intelligence (AI) of various diagnostic radiology constituencies have revealed interesting combinations of enthusiasm, caution, and implementation priorities. We surveyed academic radiology leaders about their views on AI and how they intend to approach AI implementation in their departments.

Materials and methods: We conducted a web survey of Society of Chairs of Academic Radiology Departments (SCARD) members between October 5 and October 31, 2023 to solicit optimism or pessimism about AI, target use cases, planned implementation, and perceptions of their workforce. P-values are provided only for descriptive purposes and have not been adjusted for multiple testing in this exploratory research.

Results: The survey was sent to the 112 SCARD members and 43 responded (38%). Chairs were optimistic, with no statistical difference between views of AI in general versus generative AI. Chairs plan to implement AI to improve quality and efficiency (43/43, 100%), burnout (41/43, 95%), healthcare costs (22/43, 51%), and equity (27/43, 63%) and most likely will target the post-processing (26/43, 60%), interpretation workflow (26/43, 60%), and image acquisition (18/43, 42%) steps in the imaging value chain. Chairs perceived that radiologists (36/43, 84%) and technologists (38/43, 88%) were not particularly worried about being displaced but saw trainees as slightly less confident (31/43, 72%). Free text responses revealed concerns about the cost of AI and emphasized trade-offs that needed to be balanced.

Conclusion: Radiology Chairs are optimistic about AI and poised to tackle departmental challenges. Concerns about generative AI and workforce replacement are minimal.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
放射学中的人工智能:领导力调查。
目的:对各种诊断放射学选区对人工智能(AI)的看法进行的调查显示了热情、谨慎和实施优先级的有趣组合。我们调查了学术放射学领导者对人工智能的看法,以及他们打算如何在他们的部门实施人工智能。材料和方法:我们在2023年10月5日至10月31日期间对学术放射科主席协会(SCARD)成员进行了一项网络调查,以征求对人工智能、目标用例、计划实施以及对其劳动力的看法的乐观或悲观情绪。p值仅用于描述目的,在本探索性研究中未对多重检验进行调整。结果:将问卷发送至112名SCARD会员,43名会员回复(38%)。主席们持乐观态度,对人工智能的看法在总体上与生成式人工智能之间没有统计学差异。主席们计划实施人工智能,以提高质量和效率(43/ 43,100%)、职业倦怠(41/ 43,95%)、医疗成本(22/ 43,51%)和公平性(27/ 43,63%),并且最有可能针对成像价值链中的后处理(26/ 43,60%)、解释工作流程(26/ 43,60%)和图像采集(18/ 43,42%)步骤。主席认为放射科医生(36/ 43,84%)和技术专家(38/ 43,88%)并不特别担心被取代,但认为实习生的信心略低(31/ 43,72%)。自由文本回应揭示了对人工智能成本的担忧,并强调了需要平衡的权衡。结论:放射科主任对人工智能持乐观态度,并准备好应对部门挑战。对生成式人工智能和劳动力替代的担忧微乎其微。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Characterization and Targeting of the Main Drivers of Elective Imaging Utilization: A Cross-sectional Study Applying Conjoint Analysis. Patient-Friendly Summary of the ACR Appropriateness Criteria®: Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening Based on Breast Density: 2024 Update. Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: A Leadership Survey. The End of CMS' Appropriate Use Criteria Program. Preference Signaling in the Radiology Residency Match: National Survey of Applicants.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1