As the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical practice evolves, governance structures oversee the implementation, maintenance, and monitoring of clinical AI algorithms to enhance quality, ...manage resources, and ensure patient safety. In this article, a framework is established for the infrastructure required for clinical AI implementation and presents a road map for governance. The road map answers four key questions: Who decides which tools to implement? What factors should be considered when assessing an application for implementation? How should applications be implemented in clinical practice? Finally, how should tools be monitored and maintained after clinical implementation? Among the many challenges for the implementation of AI in clinical practice, devising flexible governance structures that can quickly adapt to a changing environment will be essential to ensure quality patient care and practice improvement objectives.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the potential ...to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever-growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones.
This multi-society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.
Key points
• The incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiological practice demands increased monitoring of its utility and safety.
• Cooperation between developers, clinicians, and regulators will allow all involved to address ethical issues and monitor AI performance.
• AI can fulfil its promise to advance patient well-being if all steps from development to integration in healthcare are rigorously evaluated.
Artificial intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the potential ...to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever-growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones.
This multi-society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.
•The incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiological practice demands increased monitoring of its utility and safety.•Cooperation between developers, clinicians, and regulators will allow all involved to address ethical issues and monitor AI performance.•AI can fulfil its promise to advance patient well-being if all steps from development to integration in healthcare are rigorously evaluated.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the potential ...to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever‑growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones. This multi‑society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.
Summary
Artificial Intelligence (AI) carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences. The integration of AI in radiology holds the ...potential to revolutionize healthcare practices by advancing diagnosis, quantification, and management of multiple medical conditions. Nevertheless, the ever‐growing availability of AI tools in radiology highlights an increasing need to critically evaluate claims for its utility and to differentiate safe product offerings from potentially harmful, or fundamentally unhelpful ones. This multi‐society paper, presenting the views of Radiology Societies in the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, defines the potential practical problems and ethical issues surrounding the incorporation of AI into radiological practice. In addition to delineating the main points of concern that developers, regulators, and purchasers of AI tools should consider prior to their introduction into clinical practice, this statement also suggests methods to monitor their stability and safety in clinical use, and their suitability for possible autonomous function. This statement is intended to serve as a useful summary of the practical issues which should be considered by all parties involved in the development of radiology AI resources, and their implementation as clinical tools.
The application of deep learning (DL) in medicine introduces transformative tools with the potential to enhance prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment planning. However, ensuring transparent ...documentation is essential for researchers to enhance reproducibility and refine techniques. Our study addresses the unique challenges presented by DL in medical imaging by developing a comprehensive checklist using the Delphi method to enhance reproducibility and reliability in this dynamic field. We compiled a preliminary checklist based on a comprehensive review of existing checklists and relevant literature. A panel of 11 experts in medical imaging and DL assessed these items using Likert scales, with two survey rounds to refine responses and gauge consensus. We also employed the content validity ratio with a cutoff of 0.59 to determine item face and content validity. Round 1 included a 27-item questionnaire, with 12 items demonstrating high consensus for face and content validity that were then left out of round 2. Round 2 involved refining the checklist, resulting in an additional 17 items. In the last round, 3 items were deemed non-essential or infeasible, while 2 newly suggested items received unanimous agreement for inclusion, resulting in a final 26-item DL model reporting checklist derived from the Delphi process. The 26-item checklist facilitates the reproducible reporting of DL tools and enables scientists to replicate the study’s results.
