1
|
Stogiannos N, Gillan C, Precht H, Reis CSD, Kumar A, O'Regan T, Ellis V, Barnes A, Meades R, Pogose M, Greggio J, Scurr E, Kumar S, King G, Rosewarne D, Jones C, van Leeuwen KG, Hyde E, Beardmore C, Alliende JG, El-Farra S, Papathanasiou S, Beger J, Nash J, van Ooijen P, Zelenyanszki C, Koch B, Langmack KA, Tucker R, Goh V, Turmezei T, Lip G, Reyes-Aldasoro CC, Alonso E, Dean G, Hirani SP, Torre S, Akudjedu TN, Ohene-Botwe B, Khine R, O'Sullivan C, Kyratsis Y, McEntee M, Wheatstone P, Thackray Y, Cairns J, Jerome D, Scarsbrook A, Malamateniou C. A multidisciplinary team and multiagency approach for AI implementation: A commentary for medical imaging and radiotherapy key stakeholders. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2024; 55:101717. [PMID: 39067309 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmir.2024.101717] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/18/2024] [Accepted: 06/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/30/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolaos Stogiannos
- Division of Midwifery & Radiography, City, University of London, United Kingdom; Magnitiki Tomografia Kerkiras, Corfu, Greece.
| | - Caitlin Gillan
- Joint Department of Medical Imaging, University Health Network, Canada; Departments of Radiation Oncology & Medical Imaging, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Helle Precht
- Health Sciences Research Centre, UCL University College, Radiology Department, Lillebelt Hospital, University Hospitals of Southern Denmark, Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Discipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, Ireland
| | - Claudia Sa Dos Reis
- School of Health Sciences (HESAV), University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland (HES-SO), Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Amrita Kumar
- Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, British Institute of Radiology, United Kingdom
| | - Tracy O'Regan
- The Society and College of Radiographers, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Anna Barnes
- King's Technology Evaluation Centre, School of biomedical engineering and imaging sciences, King's College London, United Kingdom
| | - Richard Meades
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Julien Greggio
- Division of Midwifery & Radiography, City, University of London, United Kingdom; Italian Association of MR Radiographers, Cagliari, Italy
| | - Erica Scurr
- Department of Radiology, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Graham King
- Annalise.ai Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia; AI Special Focus Group, AXREM Association of Healthcare Technology Providers for Imaging Radiotherapy and Care, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Catherine Jones
- Royal Brisbane and Womens' Hospital, Brisbane, Australia; I-MED Radiology, Brisbane, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Kicky G van Leeuwen
- Romion Health, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Health AI Register, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Emma Hyde
- University of Derby, Derby, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Samar El-Farra
- Emirates Medical Society - The Radiographers Society of Emirates (RASE), United Arab Emirates
| | | | - Jan Beger
- Science and Technology Organisation, GE HealthCare, United States
| | - Jonathan Nash
- University Hospitals Sussex, United Kingdom; Kheiron Medical Technologies, London, United Kingdom; British Society of Breast Radiology, the Netherlands
| | - Peter van Ooijen
- Dept of Radiotherapy and Data Science Center in Health (DASH), University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Christiane Zelenyanszki
- Community Diagnostics, Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Barbara Koch
- Jheronimus Academy of Data Science, the Netherlands; Tilburg University, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Vicky Goh
- School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London. Department of Radiology, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Tom Turmezei
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, United Kingdom; Department of Radiology, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Eduardo Alonso
- Artificial Intelligence Research Centre, City, University of London, United Kingdom
| | - Geraldine Dean
- ESTH NHS Trust, United Kingdom; NHS SW London Imaging Network, United Kingdom
| | - Shashivadan P Hirani
- Centre for Healthcare Innovation Research, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sofia Torre
- Frimley Health Foundation Trust, United Kingdom
| | - Theophilus N Akudjedu
- Institute of Medical Imaging & Visualisation, Department of Medical Science & Public Health, Faculty of Health & Social Sciences, Bournemouth University, United Kingdom
| | - Benard Ohene-Botwe
- Department of Midwifery & Radiography, City, University of London, United Kingdom
| | - Ricardo Khine
- Institute of Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary, University of London, United Kingdom
| | - Chris O'Sullivan
- Department of Midwifery & Radiography, School of Health & Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, United Kingdom
| | - Yiannis Kyratsis
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mark McEntee
- Discipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, Ireland; Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark; Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Australia
| | | | | | - James Cairns
- Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom; Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | | | - Andrew Scarsbrook
- Department of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom; Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Christina Malamateniou
- Department of Midwifery & Radiography, City, University of London, United Kingdom; European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Stogiannos N, Jennings M, George CS, Culbertson J, Salehi H, Furterer S, Pergola M, Culp MP, Malamateniou C. The American Society of Radiologic Technologists (ASRT) AI educator survey: A cross-sectional study to explore knowledge, experience, and use of AI within education. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2024; 55:101449. [PMID: 39004006 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmir.2024.101449] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2024] [Revised: 05/09/2024] [Accepted: 06/04/2024] [Indexed: 07/16/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing medical imaging and radiation therapy. AI-powered applications are being deployed to aid Medical Radiation Technologists (MRTs) in clinical workflows, decision-making, dose optimisation, and a wide range of other tasks. Exploring the levels of AI education provided across the United States is crucial to prepare future graduates to deliver the digital future. This study aims to assess educators' levels of AI knowledge, the current state of AI educational provisions, the perceived challenges around AI education, and important factors for future advancements. METHODS An online survey was electronically administered to all radiologic technologists in the American Society of Radiologic Technologists (ASRT) database who indicated that they had an educator role in the United States. This was distributed through the membership of the ASRT, from February to April 2023. All quantitative data was analysed using frequency and descriptive statistics. The survey's open-ended questions were analysed using a conceptual content analysis approach. RESULTS Out of 5,066 educators in the ASRT database, 373 valid responses were received, resulting in a response rate of 7.4%. Despite 84.5% of educators expressing the importance of teaching AI, 23.7% currently included AI in academic curricula. Of the 76.3% that did not include AI in their curricula, lack of AI knowledge among educators was the top reason for not integrating AI in education (59.1%). Similarly, AI-enabled tools were utilised by only 11.1% of the programs to assist teaching. The levels of trust in AI varied among educators. CONCLUSION The study found that although US educators of MRTs have a good baseline knowledge of general concepts regarding AI, they could improve on the teaching and use of AI in their curricula. AI training and guidance, adequate time to develop educational resources, and funding and support from higher education institutions were key priorities as highlighted by educators.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolaos Stogiannos
- Department of Midwifery & Radiography, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, UK; Magnitiki Tomografia Kerkiras, Corfu, Greece.
| | - Michael Jennings
- Senior Research Analyst, American Society of Radiologic Technologists, New Mexico, USA
| | - Craig St George
- Director of Education, American Society of Radiologic Technologists, New Mexico, USA
| | - John Culbertson
- Director of Research, American Society of Radiologic Technologists, New Mexico, USA
| | - Hugh Salehi
- Department of Biomedical Industrial & Human Factor Engineering, Wright State University, Ohio, USA
| | - Sandra Furterer
- Department of Integrated Systems Engineering, The Ohio State University, Ohio, USA
| | - Melissa Pergola
- Chief Executive Officer, American Society of Radiologic Technologists, New Mexico, USA
| | - Melissa P Culp
- Executive Vice President of Member Engagement, American Society of Radiologic Technologists, New Mexico, USA.
| | - Christina Malamateniou
- Department of Midwifery & Radiography, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, UK; Discipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Ireland; European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Champendal M, Ribeiro RST, Müller H, Prior JO, Sá Dos Reis C. Nuclear medicine technologists practice impacted by AI denoising applications in PET/CT images. Radiography (Lond) 2024; 30:1232-1239. [PMID: 38917681 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2024] [Revised: 05/24/2024] [Accepted: 06/11/2024] [Indexed: 06/27/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Artificial intelligence (AI) in positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) can be used to improve image quality when it is useful to reduce the injected activity or the acquisition time. Particular attention must be paid to ensure that users adopt this technological innovation when outcomes can be improved by its use. The aim of this study was to identify the aspects that need to be analysed and discussed to implement an AI denoising PET/CT algorithm in clinical practice, based on the representations of Nuclear Medicine Technologists (NMT) from Western-Switzerland, highlighting the barriers and facilitators associated. METHODS Two focus groups were organised in June and September 2023, involving ten voluntary participants recruited from all types of medical imaging departments, forming a diverse sample of NMT. The interview guide followed the first stage of the revised model of Ottawa of Research Use. A content analysis was performed following the three-stage approach described by Wanlin. Ethics cleared the study. RESULTS Clinical practice, workload, knowledge and resources were de 4 themes identified as necessary to be thought before implementing an AI denoising PET/CT algorithm by ten NMT participants (aged 31-60), not familiar with this AI tool. The main barriers to implement this algorithm included workflow challenges, resistance from professionals and lack of education; while the main facilitators were explanations and the availability of support to ask questions such as a "local champion". CONCLUSION To implement a denoising algorithm in PET/CT, several aspects of clinical practice need to be thought to reduce the barriers to its implementation such as the procedures, the workload and the available resources. Participants emphasised also the importance of clear explanations, education, and support for successful implementation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE To facilitate the implementation of AI tools in clinical practice, it is important to identify the barriers and propose strategies that can mitigate it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Champendal
- School of Health Sciences HESAV, HES-SO, University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland: Lausanne, CH, Switzerland; Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, CH, Switzerland.
| | - R S T Ribeiro
- School of Health Sciences HESAV, HES-SO, University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland: Lausanne, CH, Switzerland.
| | - H Müller
- Informatics Institute, University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland (HES-SO Valais) Sierre, CH, Switzerland; Medical Faculty, University of Geneva, CH, Switzerland.
| | - J O Prior
- Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, CH, Switzerland; Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Department, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV): Lausanne, CH, Switzerland.
| | - C Sá Dos Reis
- School of Health Sciences HESAV, HES-SO, University of Applied Sciences Western Switzerland: Lausanne, CH, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Malamateniou C. Technology-enabled patient care in medical radiation sciences: the two sides of the coin. J Med Radiat Sci 2024. [PMID: 38923225 DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.807] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2024] [Accepted: 06/12/2024] [Indexed: 06/28/2024] Open
Abstract
This is an exciting time to be working in healthcare and medical radiation sciences. This article discusses the potential benefits and risks of new technological interventions for patient benefit and outlines the need for co-production, governance and education to ensure these are used for advancing patients' well-being.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Malamateniou
- Department of Midwifery & Radiography, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, London, UK
- Discipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
- European Federation of Radiographer Societies, Cumiera, Portugal
- European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Stogiannos N, Litosseliti L, O'Regan T, Scurr E, Barnes A, Kumar A, Malik R, Pogose M, Harvey H, McEntee MF, Malamateniou C. Black box no more: A cross-sectional multi-disciplinary survey for exploring governance and guiding adoption of AI in medical imaging and radiotherapy in the UK. Int J Med Inform 2024; 186:105423. [PMID: 38531254 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105423] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Revised: 03/12/2024] [Accepted: 03/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/28/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Medical Imaging and radiotherapy (MIRT) are at the forefront of artificial intelligence applications. The exponential increase of these applications has made governance frameworks necessary to uphold safe and effective clinical adoption. There is little information about how healthcare practitioners in MIRT in the UK use AI tools, their governance and associated challenges, opportunities and priorities for the future. METHODS This cross-sectional survey was open from November to December 2022 to MIRT professionals who had knowledge or made use of AI tools, as an attempt to map out current policy and practice and to identify future needs. The survey was electronically distributed to the participants. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics and inferential statistics on the SPSS statistical software. Content analysis was employed for the open-ended questions. RESULTS Among the 245 responses, the following were emphasised as central to AI adoption: governance frameworks, practitioner training, leadership, and teamwork within the AI ecosystem. Prior training was strongly correlated with increased knowledge about AI tools and frameworks. However, knowledge of related frameworks remained low, with different professionals showing different affinity to certain frameworks related to their respective roles. Common challenges and opportunities of AI adoption were also highlighted, with recommendations for future practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolaos Stogiannos
- Department of Radiography, City, University of London, UK; Magnitiki Tomografia Kerkyras, Greece.
| | - Lia Litosseliti
- School of Health & Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, UK.
| | - Tracy O'Regan
- The Society and College of Radiographers, London, UK.
| | | | - Anna Barnes
- King's Technology Evaluation Centre (KiTEC), School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Science, King's College London, UK.
| | | | | | | | | | - Mark F McEntee
- Discipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, Ireland.
| | - Christina Malamateniou
- Department of Radiography, City, University of London, UK; European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Doherty G, McLaughlin L, Hughes C, McConnell J, Bond R, McFadden S. A scoping review of educational programmes on artificial intelligence (AI) available to medical imaging staff. Radiography (Lond) 2024; 30:474-482. [PMID: 38217933 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2023.12.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2023] [Revised: 12/29/2023] [Accepted: 12/30/2023] [Indexed: 01/15/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Medical imaging is arguably the most technologically advanced field in healthcare, encompassing a range of technologies which continually evolve as computing power and human knowledge expand. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the next frontier which medical imaging is pioneering. The rapid development and implementation of AI has the potential to revolutionise healthcare, however, to do so, staff must be competent and confident in its application, hence AI readiness is an important precursor to AI adoption. Research to ascertain the best way to deliver this AI-enabled healthcare training is in its infancy. The aim of this scoping review is to compare existing studies which investigate and evaluate the efficacy of AI educational interventions for medical imaging staff. METHODS Following the creation of a search strategy and keyword searches, screening was conducted to determine study eligibility. This consisted of a title and abstract scan, then subsequently a full-text review. Articles were included if they were empirical studies wherein an educational intervention on AI for medical imaging staff was created, delivered, and evaluated. RESULTS Of the initial 1309 records returned, n = 5 (∼0.4 %) of studies met the eligibility criteria of the review. The curricula and delivery in each of the five studies shared similar aims and a 'flipped classroom' delivery was the most utilised method. However, the depth of content covered in the curricula of each varied and measured outcomes differed greatly. CONCLUSION The findings of this review will provide insights into the evaluation of existing AI educational interventions, which will be valuable when planning AI education for healthcare staff. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE This review highlights the need for standardised and comprehensive AI training programs for imaging staff.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Doherty
- Ulster University, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom.
| | - L McLaughlin
- Ulster University, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| | - C Hughes
- Ulster University, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| | - J McConnell
- Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, United Kingdom
| | - R Bond
- Ulster University, School of Computing, Faculty of Computing, Engineering and the Built Environment, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| | - S McFadden
- Ulster University, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, Shore Road, Newtownabbey, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Stogiannos N, O'Regan T, Scurr E, Litosseliti L, Pogose M, Harvey H, Kumar A, Malik R, Barnes A, McEntee MF, Malamateniou C. AI implementation in the UK landscape: Knowledge of AI governance, perceived challenges and opportunities, and ways forward for radiographers. Radiography (Lond) 2024; 30:612-621. [PMID: 38325103 DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2024.01.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2024] [Accepted: 01/26/2024] [Indexed: 02/09/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Despite the rapid increase of AI-enabled applications deployed in clinical practice, many challenges exist around AI implementation, including the clarity of governance frameworks, usability of validation of AI models, and customisation of training for radiographers. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of diagnostic and therapeutic radiographers, with existing theoretical and/or practical knowledge of AI, on issues of relevance to the field, such as AI implementation, including knowledge of AI governance and procurement, perceptions about enablers and challenges and future priorities for AI adoption. METHODS An online survey was designed and distributed to UK-based qualified radiographers who work in medical imaging and/or radiotherapy and have some previous theoretical and/or practical knowledge of working with AI. Participants were recruited through the researchers' professional networks on social media with support from the AI advisory group of the Society and College of Radiographers. Survey questions related to AI training/education, knowledge of AI governance frameworks, data privacy procedures, AI implementation considerations, and priorities for AI adoption. Descriptive statistics were employed to analyse the data, and chi-square tests were used to explore significant relationships between variables. RESULTS In total, 88 valid responses were received. Most radiographers (56.6 %) had not received any AI-related training. Also, although approximately 63 % of them used an evaluation framework to assess AI models' performance before implementation, many (36.9 %) were still unsure about suitable evaluation methods. Radiographers requested clearer guidance on AI governance, ample time to implement AI in their practice safely, adequate funding, effective leadership, and targeted support from AI champions. AI training, robust governance frameworks, and patient and public involvement were seen as priorities for the successful implementation of AI by radiographers. CONCLUSION AI implementation is progressing within radiography, but without customised training, clearer governance, key stakeholder engagement and suitable new roles created, it will be hard to harness its benefits and minimise related risks. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The results of this study highlight some of the priorities and challenges for radiographers in relation to AI adoption, namely the need for developing robust AI governance frameworks and providing optimal AI training.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- N Stogiannos
- Division of Midwifery & Radiography, City, University of London, UK; Medical Imaging Department, Corfu General Hospital, Greece.
| | - T O'Regan
- The Society and College of Radiographers, London, UK.
| | - E Scurr
- The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
| | - L Litosseliti
- School of Health & Psychological Sciences, City, University of London, UK.
| | - M Pogose
- Quality Assurance and Regulatory Affairs, Hardian Health, UK.
| | | | - A Kumar
- Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
| | - R Malik
- Bolton NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
| | - A Barnes
- King's Technology Evaluation Centre (KiTEC), School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Science, King's College London, UK.
| | - M F McEntee
- Discipline of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy, University College Cork, Ireland.
| | - C Malamateniou
- Division of Midwifery & Radiography, City, University of London, UK; Society and College of Radiographers AI Advisory Group, London, UK; European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Vienna, Austria; European Federation of Radiographer Societies, Cumieira, Portugal.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Walsh G, Stogiannos N, van de Venter R, Rainey C, Tam W, McFadden S, McNulty JP, Mekis N, Lewis S, O'Regan T, Kumar A, Huisman M, Bisdas S, Kotter E, Pinto dos Santos D, Sá dos Reis C, van Ooijen P, Brady AP, Malamateniou C. Responsible AI practice and AI education are central to AI implementation: a rapid review for all medical imaging professionals in Europe. BJR Open 2023; 5:20230033. [PMID: 37953871 PMCID: PMC10636340 DOI: 10.1259/bjro.20230033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Revised: 05/27/2023] [Accepted: 05/30/2023] [Indexed: 11/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has transitioned from the lab to the bedside, and it is increasingly being used in healthcare. Radiology and Radiography are on the frontline of AI implementation, because of the use of big data for medical imaging and diagnosis for different patient groups. Safe and effective AI implementation requires that responsible and ethical practices are upheld by all key stakeholders, that there is harmonious collaboration between different professional groups, and customised educational provisions for all involved. This paper outlines key principles of ethical and responsible AI, highlights recent educational initiatives for clinical practitioners and discusses the synergies between all medical imaging professionals as they prepare for the digital future in Europe. Responsible and ethical AI is vital to enhance a culture of safety and trust for healthcare professionals and patients alike. Educational and training provisions for medical imaging professionals on AI is central to the understanding of basic AI principles and applications and there are many offerings currently in Europe. Education can facilitate the transparency of AI tools, but more formalised, university-led training is needed to ensure the academic scrutiny, appropriate pedagogy, multidisciplinarity and customisation to the learners' unique needs are being adhered to. As radiographers and radiologists work together and with other professionals to understand and harness the benefits of AI in medical imaging, it becomes clear that they are faced with the same challenges and that they have the same needs. The digital future belongs to multidisciplinary teams that work seamlessly together, learn together, manage risk collectively and collaborate for the benefit of the patients they serve.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gemma Walsh
- Division of Midwifery & Radiography, City University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Clare Rainey
- School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Derry~Londonderry, Northern Ireland
| | - Winnie Tam
- Division of Midwifery & Radiography, City University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Sonyia McFadden
- School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, United Kingdom
| | | | - Nejc Mekis
- Medical Imaging and Radiotherapy Department, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ljubljana, Slovenia
| | - Sarah Lewis
- Discipline of Medical Imaging Science, Sydney School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tracy O'Regan
- The Society and College of Radiographers, London, United Kingdom
| | - Amrita Kumar
- Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust, Frimley, United Kingdom
| | - Merel Huisman
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Cláudia Sá dos Reis
- School of Health Sciences (HESAV), University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland (HES-SO), Lausanne, Switzerland
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|