Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Stakeholders’ perspectives on the future of artificial intelligence in radiology: a scoping review

  • Imaging Informatics and Artificial Intelligence
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to impact clinical practice and healthcare delivery. AI is of particular significance in radiology due to its use in automatic analysis of image characteristics. This scoping review examines stakeholder perspectives on AI use in radiology, the benefits, risks, and challenges to its integration.

Methods

A search was conducted from 1960 to November 2019 in EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and grey literature. Publications reflecting stakeholder attitudes toward AI were included with no restrictions.

Results

Commentaries (n = 32), surveys (n = 13), presentation abstracts (n = 8), narrative reviews (n = 8), and a social media study (n = 1) were included from 62 eligible publications. These represent the views of radiologists, surgeons, medical students, patients, computer scientists, and the general public. Seven themes were identified (predicted impact, potential replacement, trust in AI, knowledge of AI, education, economic considerations, and medicolegal implications). Stakeholders anticipate a significant impact on radiology, though replacement of radiologists is unlikely in the near future. Knowledge of AI is limited for non-computer scientists and further education is desired. Many expressed the need for collaboration between radiologists and AI specialists to successfully improve patient care.

Conclusions

Stakeholder views generally suggest that AI can improve the practice of radiology and consider the replacement of radiologists unlikely. Most stakeholders identified the need for education and training on AI, as well as collaborative efforts to improve AI implementation. Further research is needed to gain perspectives from non-Western countries, non-radiologist stakeholders, on economic considerations, and medicolegal implications.

Key Points

  • Stakeholders generally expressed that AI alone cannot be used to replace radiologists. The scope of practice is expected to shift with AI use affecting areas from image interpretation to patient care.

  • Patients and the general public do not know how to address potential errors made by AI systems while radiologists believe that they should be “in-the-loop” in terms of responsibility. Ethical accountability strategies must be developed across governance levels.

  • Students, residents, and radiologists believe that there is a lack in AI education during medical school and residency. The radiology community should work with IT specialists to ensure that AI technology benefits their work and centres patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Abbreviations

AI:

Artificial intelligence

ANN:

Artificial neural networks

CADTH:

Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

CINAHL:

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature

DL:

Deep learning

ML:

Machine learning

PRISMA:

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

References

  1. Klumpp M (2018) Automation and artificial intelligence in business logistics systems: human reactions and collaboration requirements. Int J Log Res Appl 21:224–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Elizalde-Ramírez F, Nigenda RS, Martínez-Salazar IA, Ríos-Solís YÁ (2019) Travel plans in public transit networks using artificial intelligence planning models. Appl Artif Intell 33:440–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alarie B, Niblett A, Yoon AH (2018) How artificial intelligence will affect the practice of law. Univ Tor Law J 68:106–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Nguyen H, Bui X-N (2019) Predicting blast-induced air overpressure: a robust artificial intelligence system based on artificial neural networks and random forest. Nat Resour Res 28:893–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rodríguez F, Fleetwood A, Galarza A, Fontán L (2018) Predicting solar energy generation through artificial neural networks using weather forecasts for microgrid control. Renew Energy 126:855–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Krittanawong C (2018) The rise of artificial intelligence and the uncertain future for physicians. Eur J Intern Med 48:e13–e14

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ramesh A, Kambhampati C, Monson JR, Drew P (2004) Artificial intelligence in medicine. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 86:334

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Ardila D, Kiraly AP, Bharadwaj S et al (2019) End-to-end lung cancer screening with three-dimensional deep learning on low-dose chest computed tomography. Nat Med 25:954

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lorenzetti L (2016) Here’s how IBM Watson Health is transforming the health care industry. Fortune (April 5)

  10. Bloch-Budzier S (2016) NHS using Google technology to treat patients. BBC News 22

  11. Conant EF, Toledano AY, Periaswamy S et al (2019) Improving accuracy and efficiency with concurrent use of artificial intelligence for digital breast tomosynthesis. Radiology: AI 1:e180096

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Gottumukkala RV, Le TQ, Duszak R Jr, Prabhakar AM (2018) Radiologists are actually well positioned to innovate in patient experience. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 47:206–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Obermeyer Z, Emanuel EJ (2016) Predicting the future—big data, machine learning, and clinical medicine. N Engl J Med 375:1216

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Kruskal JB, Berkowitz S, Geis JR, Kim W, Nagy P, Dreyer K (2017) Big data and machine learning—strategies for driving this bus: a summary of the 2016 intersociety summer conference. J Am Coll Radiol 14:811–817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tang A, Tam R, Cadrin-Chênevert A et al (2018) Canadian Association of Radiologists white paper on artificial intelligence in radiology. Can Assoc Radiol J 69:120–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pesapane F, Codari M, Sardanelli F (2018) Artificial intelligence in medical imaging: threat or opportunity? Radiologists again at the forefront of innovation in medicine. Eur Radiol Exp 2:35

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Faggella D (2020) What is Machine Learning. Available via https://emerj.com/ai-glossary-terms/what-is-machine-learning/

  18. Wiemken TL, Kelley RR (2020) Machine learning in epidemiology and health outcomes research. Annu Rev Public Health 41:21–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Alpaydin E (2014) Introduction to machine learning, 3 edn

  20. Lisboa PJ, Taktak AF (2006) The use of artificial neural networks in decision support in cancer: a systematic review. Neural Netw 19:408–415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sherriff A, Ott J, Team AS (2004) Artificial neural networks as statistical tools in epidemiological studies: analysis of risk factors for early infant wheeze. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 18:456–463

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G (2015) Deep learning. Nature 521:436–444

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Ching T, Himmelstein DS, Beaulieu-Jones BK et al (2018) Opportunities and obstacles for deep learning in biology and medicine. J R Soc Interface 15

  24. Suzuki K (2017) Overview of deep learning in medical imaging. Radiol Phys Technol 10:257–273

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK (2010) Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 5:69

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Arksey H, O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 8:19–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (2013) Grey Matters: a practical search tool for evidence-based medicine. CADTH, Ottawa. Available via https://www.cadth.ca/resources/finding-evidence/grey-matters

  28. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W et al (2018) PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 169:467–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ooi SKG, Makmur A, Soon AYQ et al (2019) Attitudes toward artificial intelligence in radiology with learner needs assessment within radiology residency programmes: a national multi-programme survey. Singap Med J:04

  30. Eltorai AEM, Bratt AK, Guo HH (2019) Thoracic radiologists’ versus computer scientists’ perspectives on the future of artificial intelligence in radiology. J Thorac Imaging 35:255–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gong B, Nugent JP, Guest W et al (2019) Influence of artificial intelligence on Canadian medical students’ preference for radiology specialty: a national survey study. Acad Radiol 26:566–577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2019) Impact of artificial intelligence on radiology: a EuroAIM survey among members of the European Society of Radiology. Insights Imaging 10:105

  33. Aminololama-Shakeri S, Lopez JE (2019) The doctor-patient relationship with artificial intelligence. AJR Am J Roentgenol 212:308–310

  34. Shalaby SM, El-Badawy M, Hanafy A (2019) A white paper on artificial intelligence in radiology, getting over the hype. Clin Radiol 74 (Supplement 2):e11

  35. Aerts HJWL (2018) Data science in radiology: a path forward. Clin Cancer Res 24:532–534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Beregi JP, Zins M, Masson JP et al (2018) Radiology and artificial intelligence: an opportunity for our specialty. Diagn Interv Imaging 99:677–678

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hirschmann A, Cyriac J, Stieltjes B, Kober T, Richiardi J, Omoumi P (2019) Artificial intelligence in musculoskeletal imaging: review of current literature, challenges, and trends. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 23:304–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Moore MM, Slonimsky E, Long AD, Sze RW, Iyer RS (2019) Machine learning concepts, concerns and opportunities for a pediatric radiologist. Pediatr Radiol 49:509–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Nguyen GK, Shetty AS (2018) Artificial intelligence and machine learning: opportunities for radiologists in training. J Am Coll Radiol 15:1320–1321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Chan S, Siegel EL (2019) Will machine learning end the viability of radiology as a thriving medical specialty? Br J Radiol 92(1094). https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20180416

  41. Yi PH, Hui FK, Ting DSW (2018) Artificial intelligence and radiology: collaboration is key. J Am Coll Radiol 15:781–783

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Syed AB, Zoga AC (2018) Artificial intelligence in radiology: current technology and future directions. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 22:540–545

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Giger ML (2018) Machine learning in medical imaging. J Am Coll Radiol Part B 15:512–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Nawrocki T, Maldjian PD, Slasky SE, Contractor SG (2018) Artificial intelligence and radiology: have rumors of the radiologist’s demise been greatly exaggerated? Acad Radiol 25:967–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Dreyer KJ, Geis JR (2017) When machines think: radiology’s next frontier. Radiology 285:713–718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Kohli M, Prevedello LM, Filice RW, Geis JR (2017) Implementing machine learning in radiology practice and research. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:754–760

  47. Chockley K, Emanuel E (2016) The end of radiology? Three threats to the future practice of radiology. J Am Coll Radiol Part PA 13:1415–1420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. European Society of Radiology (ESR) (2019) What the radiologist should know about artificial intelligence - an ESR white paper. Insights Imaging 10:44

  49. Langs G, Rohrich S, Hofmanninger J et al (2018) Machine learning: from radiomics to discovery and routine. Radiologe 58:1–6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Wong SH, Al-Hasani H, Alam Z, Alam A (2019) Artificial intelligence in radiology: how will we be affected? Eur Radiol 29:141–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Brotchie P (2019) Machine learning in radiology. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 63:25–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Kocak B, Durmaz ES, Ates E, Kilickesmez O (2019) Radiomics with artificial intelligence: a practical guide for beginners. Diagn Interv Radiol 25:485–495

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Marieke H, Yfke PO, Saar H, Thomas CK, Derya Y (2019) A qualitative study to understand patient perspective on the use of artificial intelligence in radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 16:1416–1419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Goldberg JE, Rosenkrantz AB (2019) Artificial intelligence and radiology: a social media perspective. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 48:308–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Jalal S, Nicolaou S, Parker W (2019) Artificial intelligence, radiology, and the way forward. Can Assoc Radiol J 70:10–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hainc N, Federau C, Stieltjes B, Blatow M, Bink A, Stippich C (2017) The bright, artificial intelligence-augmented future of neuroimaging reading. Front Neurol 8 (SEP). https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2017.00489

  57. Blum A, Zins M (2017) Radiology: is its future bright? Diagn Interv Imaging 98:369–371

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Haan M, Ongena YP, Hommes S, Kwee TC, Yakar D (2019) A qualitative study to understand patient perspective on the use of artificial intelligence in radiology. J Am Coll Radiol 16:1416–1419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Collado-Mesa F, Alvarez E, Arheart K (2018) The role of artificial intelligence in diagnostic radiology: a survey at a single radiology residency training program. J Am Coll Radiol 15:1753–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Waymel Q, Badr S, Demondion X, Cotten A, Jacques T (2019) Impact of the rise of artificial intelligence in radiology: what do radiologists think? Diagn Interv Imaging 100:327–336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Koh DM (2019) Attitudes and perception of artificial intelligence and machine learning in oncological imaging. Cancer Imaging Conference: 19th Meeting and Annual of the International Cancer Imaging Society Italy 19. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.578983

  62. Jv H, Huber A, Leichtle A et al (2019) A survey on the future of radiology among radiologists, medical students and surgeons: students and surgeons tend to be more skeptical about artificial intelligence and radiologists may fear that other disciplines take over. Eur J Radiol 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108742

  63. Tajmir SH, Alkasab TK (2018) Toward augmented radiologists: changes in radiology education in the era of machine learning and artificial intelligence. Acad Radiol 25:747–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Liew C (2018) The future of radiology augmented with Artificial Intelligence: a strategy for success. Eur J Radiol 102:152–156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Mazurowski MA (2019) Artificial intelligence may cause a significant disruption to the radiology workforce. J Am Coll Radiol 16:1077–1082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Gallix B, Chong J (2019) Artificial intelligence in radiology: who’s afraid of the big bad wolf? Eur Radiol 29:1637–1639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Massat MB (2018) A promising future for AI in breast cancer screening. Appl Radiol 47:22–25

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kim W (2019) Imaging informatics. Fear, hype, hope, and reality: how AI is entering the health care system. Radiology Today 20:6–7

    Google Scholar 

  69. Thrall JH, Li X, Li Q et al (2018) Artificial intelligence and machine learning in radiology: opportunities, challenges, pitfalls, and criteria for success. J Am Coll Radiol 15:504–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Recht M, Bryan RN (2017) Artificial intelligence: threat or boon to radiologists? J Am Coll Radiol 14:1476–1480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Conway S (2017) The Radiologisaurus: why THEY want YOU to become a dinosaur. Appl Radiol 46:30

    Google Scholar 

  72. Santos DP, Giese D, Brodehl S et al (2019) Medical students’ attitude towards artificial intelligence: a multicentre survey. Eur Radiol 29:1640–1646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Dbouk S, Auloge P, Cazzato RL et al (2019) Awareness and knowledge of interventional radiology by medical students in one of the largest medical schools in France. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 42(3 Supplement):S284

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ongena YP, Haan M, Yakar D, Kwee TC (2019) Patients’ views on the implementation of artificial intelligence in radiology: development and validation of a standardized questionnaire. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06486-0

  75. Yamada K (2018) The future of radiology? Asian perspectives. Neuroradiology 60 (1 Supplement 1):93-94

  76. Rosenkrantz AB, Hawkins CM (2017) Use of Twitter polls to determine public opinion regarding content presented at a major national specialty society meeting. J Am Coll Radiol 14:177–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Wolff J, Pauling J, Keck A, Baumbach J (2020) The economic impact of artificial intelligence in health care: systematic review. J Med Internet Res 22(2):e16866

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Hosny A, Parmar C, Quackenbush J, Schwartz LH, Aerts HJ (2018) Artificial intelligence in radiology. Nat Rev Cancer 18:500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Saba L, Biswas M, Kuppili V et al (2019) The present and future of deep learning in radiology. Eur J Radiol 114:14–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Geis JR, Brady AP, Wu CC et al (2019) Ethics of artificial intelligence in radiology: summary of the joint European and North American multisociety statement. Can Assoc Radiol J 70:329–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kobayashi Y, Ishibashi M, Kobayashi H (2019) How will “democratization of artificial intelligence” change the future of radiologists? Jpn J Radiol 37:9–14

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Reiner BI (2014) A crisis in confidence: a combined challenge and opportunity for medical imaging providers. J Am Coll Radiol 11:107–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Strickland N (2018) What can Radiologists realistically expect from artificial intelligence? J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 62:56–83

    Google Scholar 

  84. Pesapane F (2019) How scientific mobility can help current and future radiology research: a radiology trainee’s perspective. Insights Imaging 10:85

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Bratt A (2019) Why radiologists have nothing to fear from deep learning. J Am Coll Radiol 16:1190–1192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. O’Regan D (2017) The power of “Big Data”: a digital revolution in clinical radiology? Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 39:778–781

    Google Scholar 

  87. Schier R (2018) Artificial intelligence and the practice of radiology: an alternative view. J Am Coll Radiol 15:1004–1007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Tang L (2018) Radiological evaluation of advanced gastric cancer: from image to big data radiomics. Chin J Gastrointest Surg 21:1106

    Google Scholar 

  89. Burdorf B (2019) A medical student’s outlook on radiology in light of artificial intelligence. J Am Coll Radiol 16:1514–1515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Purohit K (2019) Growing interest in radiology despite AI fears. Acad Radiol 26:e75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Odle T (2020) The AI era: the role of medical imaging and radiation therapy professionals. Radiol Technol 91:391–400

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Woznitza N (2020) Artificial intelligence and the radiographer/radiological technologist profession: a joint statement of the International Society of Radiographers and Radiological Technologists and the European Federation of Radiographer Societies. Radiography 26:93–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada

    Ling Yang, Ioana Cezara Ene & Pasqualina (Lina) Santaguida

  2. University of Tabriz, 29 Bahman Boulevard, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan Province, Iran

    Reza Arabi Belaghi

  3. Department of Radiology, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada

    David Koff

  4. McMaster Children’s Hospital, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8N 3Z5, Canada

    Nina Stein

Authors
  1. Ling Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ioana Cezara Ene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Reza Arabi Belaghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Koff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nina Stein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pasqualina (Lina) Santaguida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pasqualina (Lina) Santaguida.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Pasqualina (Lina) Santaguida.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Statistics and Biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed Consent

Written informed consent was not required for this study because this study is based on a review of publicly available data and does not involve human or animal subjects.

Ethical Approval

Institutional Review Board approval was not required because this study is based on a review of publicly available data and does not involve human or animal subjects.

Methodology

• scoping review

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Ling Yang and Ioana Cezara Ene are co-first authors.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(DOCX 244 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, ., Ene, I.C., Arabi Belaghi, R. et al. Stakeholders’ perspectives on the future of artificial intelligence in radiology: a scoping review. Eur Radiol 32, 1477–1495 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08214-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08214-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation