临床医生对使用人工智能对MRI脑部扫描进行分类的看法。

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING European Journal of Radiology Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.111921
Munaib Din , Karan Daga , Jihad Saoud , David Wood , Patrick Kierkegaard , Peter Brex , Thomas C Booth
{"title":"临床医生对使用人工智能对MRI脑部扫描进行分类的看法。","authors":"Munaib Din ,&nbsp;Karan Daga ,&nbsp;Jihad Saoud ,&nbsp;David Wood ,&nbsp;Patrick Kierkegaard ,&nbsp;Peter Brex ,&nbsp;Thomas C Booth","doi":"10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.111921","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Artificial intelligence (AI) tools can triage radiology scans to streamline the patient pathway and also relieve clinician workload. Validated AI tools can mitigate the delays in reporting scans by flagging time-sensitive and actionable findings. In this study, we aim to investigate current stakeholder perspectives and identify obstacles to integrating AI in clinical pathways. We created a survey to ascertain the perspectives of 133 clinicians across the United Kingdom regarding the acceptability of an AI tool that triages MRI brain scans into ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’. As part of this survey, we supplied clinicians with information on training and validation case numbers, model performance, validation using unseen data, and explainability saliency maps. With regards to the specific use case of AI in MRI brain scans, 71% of respondents preferred the use of an AI-assisted triage compared to the current system without triage, typically chronologically. Notably, information that explained and helped visualise the AI model's decision making was found to improve clinician confidence. When shown a heatmap, 60% of participants felt more confident in the AI’s decision. The results of this short communication demonstrate a positive support for the implementation of AI-assistive tools in triage.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12063,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Radiology","volume":"183 ","pages":"Article 111921"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinicians’ perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence to triage MRI brain scans\",\"authors\":\"Munaib Din ,&nbsp;Karan Daga ,&nbsp;Jihad Saoud ,&nbsp;David Wood ,&nbsp;Patrick Kierkegaard ,&nbsp;Peter Brex ,&nbsp;Thomas C Booth\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.111921\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Artificial intelligence (AI) tools can triage radiology scans to streamline the patient pathway and also relieve clinician workload. Validated AI tools can mitigate the delays in reporting scans by flagging time-sensitive and actionable findings. In this study, we aim to investigate current stakeholder perspectives and identify obstacles to integrating AI in clinical pathways. We created a survey to ascertain the perspectives of 133 clinicians across the United Kingdom regarding the acceptability of an AI tool that triages MRI brain scans into ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’. As part of this survey, we supplied clinicians with information on training and validation case numbers, model performance, validation using unseen data, and explainability saliency maps. With regards to the specific use case of AI in MRI brain scans, 71% of respondents preferred the use of an AI-assisted triage compared to the current system without triage, typically chronologically. Notably, information that explained and helped visualise the AI model's decision making was found to improve clinician confidence. When shown a heatmap, 60% of participants felt more confident in the AI’s decision. The results of this short communication demonstrate a positive support for the implementation of AI-assistive tools in triage.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12063,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Radiology\",\"volume\":\"183 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111921\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X25000075\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X25000075","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人工智能(AI)工具可以对放射扫描进行分流,从而简化患者就医流程,减轻临床医生的工作量。经过验证的人工智能工具可以通过标记具有时间敏感性和可操作性的结果来减少扫描报告的延误。在本研究中,我们旨在调查当前利益相关者的观点,并找出将人工智能整合到临床路径中的障碍。我们进行了一项调查,以确定英国 133 名临床医生对将核磁共振成像脑部扫描分为 "正常 "和 "异常 "两类的人工智能工具的可接受性的看法。作为调查的一部分,我们向临床医生提供了有关训练和验证病例数、模型性能、使用未见数据进行验证以及可解释性突出图的信息。关于人工智能在核磁共振成像脑部扫描中的具体应用案例,71% 的受访者倾向于使用人工智能辅助分流,而不是当前的无分流系统(通常是按时间顺序分流)。值得注意的是,解释和帮助可视化人工智能模型决策的信息被认为能提高临床医生的信心。当看到热图时,60% 的参与者对人工智能的决策更有信心。这一简短交流的结果表明,人工智能辅助工具在分诊中的应用得到了积极的支持。
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
Clinicians’ perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence to triage MRI brain scans
Artificial intelligence (AI) tools can triage radiology scans to streamline the patient pathway and also relieve clinician workload. Validated AI tools can mitigate the delays in reporting scans by flagging time-sensitive and actionable findings. In this study, we aim to investigate current stakeholder perspectives and identify obstacles to integrating AI in clinical pathways. We created a survey to ascertain the perspectives of 133 clinicians across the United Kingdom regarding the acceptability of an AI tool that triages MRI brain scans into ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’. As part of this survey, we supplied clinicians with information on training and validation case numbers, model performance, validation using unseen data, and explainability saliency maps. With regards to the specific use case of AI in MRI brain scans, 71% of respondents preferred the use of an AI-assisted triage compared to the current system without triage, typically chronologically. Notably, information that explained and helped visualise the AI model's decision making was found to improve clinician confidence. When shown a heatmap, 60% of participants felt more confident in the AI’s decision. The results of this short communication demonstrate a positive support for the implementation of AI-assistive tools in triage.
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
398
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: European Journal of Radiology is an international journal which aims to communicate to its readers, state-of-the-art information on imaging developments in the form of high quality original research articles and timely reviews on current developments in the field. Its audience includes clinicians at all levels of training including radiology trainees, newly qualified imaging specialists and the experienced radiologist. Its aim is to inform efficient, appropriate and evidence-based imaging practice to the benefit of patients worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Optimizing lower extremity CT angiography: A prospective study of individualized vs. fixed post-trigger delays in bolus tracking Automated segmentation by SCA-UNet can be directly used for radiomics diagnosis of thymic epithelial tumors Analysis of clinical and imaging characteristics of pseudocirrhosis in breast cancer liver metastasis A “novel” MRI sequence for improving conspicuity and detection of hemorrhagic foci in pelvic endometriosis: Technical note Prediction of microsatellite-stable/epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition molecular subtype gastric cancer using CT radiomics and clinicopathologic factors
×
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