人工智能在放射学中的伦理导航:对放射技师观点的横断面研究。

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2024-05-11 DOI:10.1186/s12910-024-01052-w
Faten Mane Aldhafeeri
{"title":"人工智能在放射学中的伦理导航:对放射技师观点的横断面研究。","authors":"Faten Mane Aldhafeeri","doi":"10.1186/s12910-024-01052-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiography presents transformative opportunities for diagnostic imaging and introduces complex ethical considerations. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore radiographers' perspectives on the ethical implications of AI in their field and identify key concerns and potential strategies for addressing them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A structured questionnaire was distributed to a diverse group of radiographers in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire included items on ethical concerns related to AI, the perceived impact on clinical practice, and suggestions for ethical AI integration in radiography. The data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods to capture a broad range of perspectives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred eighty-eight radiographers responded and had varying levels of experience and specializations. Most (44.8%) participants were unfamiliar with the integration of AI into radiography. Approximately 32.9% of radiographers expressed uncertainty regarding the importance of transparency and explanatory capabilities in the AI systems used in radiology. Many (36.9%) participants indicated that they believed that AI systems used in radiology should be transparent and provide justifications for their decision-making procedures. A significant preponderance (44%) of respondents agreed that implementing AI in radiology may increase ethical dilemmas. However, 27.8%expressed uncertainty in recognizing and understanding the potential ethical issues that could arise from integrating AI in radiology. Of the respondents, 41.5% stated that the use of AI in radiology required establishing specific ethical guidelines. However, a significant percentage (28.9%) expressed the opposite opinion, arguing that utilizing AI in radiology does not require adherence to ethical standards. In contrast to the 46.6% of respondents voicing concerns about patient privacy over AI implementation, 41.5% of respondents did not have any such apprehensions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study revealed a complex ethical landscape in the integration of AI in radiography, characterized by enthusiasm and apprehension among professionals. It underscores the necessity for ethical frameworks, education, and policy development to guide the implementation of AI in radiography. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on AI in medical imaging and provide insights that can inform policymakers, educators, and practitioners in navigating the ethical challenges of AI adoption in healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"25 1","pages":"52"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11088142/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Navigating the ethical landscape of artificial intelligence in radiography: a cross-sectional study of radiographers' perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Faten Mane Aldhafeeri\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12910-024-01052-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiography presents transformative opportunities for diagnostic imaging and introduces complex ethical considerations. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore radiographers' perspectives on the ethical implications of AI in their field and identify key concerns and potential strategies for addressing them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A structured questionnaire was distributed to a diverse group of radiographers in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire included items on ethical concerns related to AI, the perceived impact on clinical practice, and suggestions for ethical AI integration in radiography. The data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods to capture a broad range of perspectives.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three hundred eighty-eight radiographers responded and had varying levels of experience and specializations. Most (44.8%) participants were unfamiliar with the integration of AI into radiography. Approximately 32.9% of radiographers expressed uncertainty regarding the importance of transparency and explanatory capabilities in the AI systems used in radiology. Many (36.9%) participants indicated that they believed that AI systems used in radiology should be transparent and provide justifications for their decision-making procedures. A significant preponderance (44%) of respondents agreed that implementing AI in radiology may increase ethical dilemmas. However, 27.8%expressed uncertainty in recognizing and understanding the potential ethical issues that could arise from integrating AI in radiology. Of the respondents, 41.5% stated that the use of AI in radiology required establishing specific ethical guidelines. However, a significant percentage (28.9%) expressed the opposite opinion, arguing that utilizing AI in radiology does not require adherence to ethical standards. In contrast to the 46.6% of respondents voicing concerns about patient privacy over AI implementation, 41.5% of respondents did not have any such apprehensions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study revealed a complex ethical landscape in the integration of AI in radiography, characterized by enthusiasm and apprehension among professionals. It underscores the necessity for ethical frameworks, education, and policy development to guide the implementation of AI in radiography. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on AI in medical imaging and provide insights that can inform policymakers, educators, and practitioners in navigating the ethical challenges of AI adoption in healthcare.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11088142/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01052-w\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-024-01052-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工智能(AI)与放射学的结合为影像诊断带来了变革性机遇,同时也带来了复杂的伦理问题。本横断面研究旨在探讨放射技师对人工智能在其领域中的伦理影响的看法,并确定关键问题和解决这些问题的潜在策略:向沙特阿拉伯的各类放射技师发放了一份结构化问卷。问卷包括与人工智能相关的伦理问题、对临床实践的影响以及将人工智能融入放射学的伦理建议等项目。采用定量和定性方法对数据进行了分析,以捕捉广泛的视角:共有 388 名放射技师做出了回应,他们的经验和专业水平各不相同。大多数参与者(44.8%)不熟悉将人工智能融入放射学。约 32.9% 的放射技师对放射学中使用的人工智能系统的透明度和解释能力的重要性表示不确定。许多参与者(36.9%)表示,他们认为放射学中使用的人工智能系统应该是透明的,并为其决策程序提供理由。绝大多数受访者(44%)同意,在放射学中使用人工智能可能会增加伦理困境。然而,27.8%的受访者表示无法确定是否认识和理解将人工智能应用于放射学可能产生的潜在伦理问题。41.5%的受访者表示,在放射学中使用人工智能需要制定具体的伦理准则。不过,也有相当大比例的受访者(28.9%)表达了相反的观点,认为在放射学中使用人工智能不需要遵守伦理标准。46.6%的受访者表示担心人工智能的实施会影响患者隐私,与此形成鲜明对比的是,41.5%的受访者没有任何此类担忧:这项研究揭示了人工智能与放射学结合过程中复杂的伦理状况,专业人员对此既充满热情,又心存忧虑。它强调了伦理框架、教育和政策制定的必要性,以指导人工智能在放射学中的应用。这些研究结果为目前有关医学影像领域人工智能的讨论做出了贡献,并为政策制定者、教育工作者和从业人员在应对医疗保健领域采用人工智能所带来的伦理挑战时提供了启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Navigating the ethical landscape of artificial intelligence in radiography: a cross-sectional study of radiographers' perspectives.

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiography presents transformative opportunities for diagnostic imaging and introduces complex ethical considerations. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore radiographers' perspectives on the ethical implications of AI in their field and identify key concerns and potential strategies for addressing them.

Methods: A structured questionnaire was distributed to a diverse group of radiographers in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire included items on ethical concerns related to AI, the perceived impact on clinical practice, and suggestions for ethical AI integration in radiography. The data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods to capture a broad range of perspectives.

Results: Three hundred eighty-eight radiographers responded and had varying levels of experience and specializations. Most (44.8%) participants were unfamiliar with the integration of AI into radiography. Approximately 32.9% of radiographers expressed uncertainty regarding the importance of transparency and explanatory capabilities in the AI systems used in radiology. Many (36.9%) participants indicated that they believed that AI systems used in radiology should be transparent and provide justifications for their decision-making procedures. A significant preponderance (44%) of respondents agreed that implementing AI in radiology may increase ethical dilemmas. However, 27.8%expressed uncertainty in recognizing and understanding the potential ethical issues that could arise from integrating AI in radiology. Of the respondents, 41.5% stated that the use of AI in radiology required establishing specific ethical guidelines. However, a significant percentage (28.9%) expressed the opposite opinion, arguing that utilizing AI in radiology does not require adherence to ethical standards. In contrast to the 46.6% of respondents voicing concerns about patient privacy over AI implementation, 41.5% of respondents did not have any such apprehensions.

Conclusions: This study revealed a complex ethical landscape in the integration of AI in radiography, characterized by enthusiasm and apprehension among professionals. It underscores the necessity for ethical frameworks, education, and policy development to guide the implementation of AI in radiography. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on AI in medical imaging and provide insights that can inform policymakers, educators, and practitioners in navigating the ethical challenges of AI adoption in healthcare.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
A case study of Muslims' perspectives of expanded terminal sedation:addressing the elephant in the room. Ethical issues in vaccine trial participation by adolescents: qualitative insights on family decision making from a human papillomavirus vaccine trial in Tanzania. Scoping review and thematic analysis of informed consent in humanitarian emergencies. Healthcare workers' opinions on non-medical criteria for prioritisation of access to care during the pandemic. "I think all of us should have […] much better training in ethics." Ethical challenges in policy making during the COVID-19 pandemic: Results from an interview study with Swiss policy makers and scientists.
×
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