International radiology societies are suggesting four key considerations for providers planning to purchase artificial intelligence in their practice.
RSNA, the American College of Radiology and others shared their advice in a new joint statement published Monday across several imaging journals. The governing bodies of the five societies carried out a formal peer review of the paper prior to publishing it.
“Artificial intelligence carries the potential for unprecedented disruption in radiology, with possible positive and negative consequences,” ACR, RSNA, the Canadian Association of Radiologists, the European Society of Radiology, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists wrote Jan. 22. “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.”
To help practices navigate this issue, the five societies detailed four aspects potential purchasers should consider:
- What is the intended use of the AI, who will most benefit from its use, which risks are associated with its use and what is the potential economic impact?
- How will the AI tool be integrated into the institutions’ workflows and how can the commercial claims be verified and monitored?
- How do users need to be trained and which psychological effects need to be considered with regard to human-AI interaction?
- Is the FDA (or other agency) approval/clearance data reflective of accuracy on local data? Is that accuracy on local data sufficient for use in that institution and will users accept and hence engage with the AI results?
Lead author Dr. Adrian P. Brady, chair of the European Society of Radiology Board of Directors, and colleagues also detailed other “essential factors” in making an informed decision. Those include potential costs (both capital and recurrent), risks associated with implementation, the vendor’s compatibility as a reliable partner, staying power in a competitive environment, and opportunities for collaboration beyond purchase.
"This statement from RSNA and other leading radiology societies provides important guidance for our profession," Charles E. Kahn Jr., MD, editor of Radiology: Artificial Intelligence, which published the paper [1], said in an announcement. "It identifies key concerns that must be addressed to develop, implement, and monitor AI systems for clinical practice."
You can read the full statement, titled "Developing, Purchasing, Implementing and Monitoring AI Tools in Radiology: Practical Considerations. A Multi-Society Statement from the ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR and RSNA,” for free at the link below.
Marty Stempniak has covered healthcare since 2012, with his byline appearing in the American Hospital Association's member magazine, Modern Healthcare and McKnight's. Prior to that, he wrote about village government and local business for his hometown newspaper in Oak Park, Illinois. He won a Peter Lisagor and Gold EXCEL awards in 2017 for his coverage of the opioid epidemic.