Imaging Artificial Intelligence: A Framework for Radiologists to Address Health Equity, From the AJR Special Series on DEI

Climate change and artificial intelligence in healthcare: Review and recommendations towards a sustainable future

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has revolutionized the industry, offering significant improvements in diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and patient outcomes. However, the increasing adoption of AI systems also raises concerns about their environmental impact, particularly in the context of climate change. This review explores the intersection of climate change and AI in healthcare, examining the challenges posed by the energy consumption and carbon footprint of AI systems, as well as the potential solutions to mitigate their environmental impact. The review highlights the energy-intensive nature of AI model training and deployment, the contribution of data centers to greenhouse gas emissions, and the generation of electronic waste. To address these challenges, the development of energy-efficient AI models, the adoption of green computing practices, and the integration of renewable energy sources are discussed as potential solutions. The review also emphasizes the role of AI in optimizing healthcare workflows, reducing resource waste, and facilitating sustainable practices such as telemedicine. Furthermore, the importance of policy and governance frameworks, global initiatives, and collaborative efforts in promoting sustainable AI practices in healthcare is explored. The review concludes by outlining best practices for sustainable AI deployment, including eco-design, lifecycle assessment, responsible data management, and continuous monitoring and improvement. As the healthcare industry continues to embrace AI technologies, prioritizing sustainability and environmental responsibility is crucial to ensure that the benefits of AI are realized while actively contributing to the preservation of our planet.

Navigating the ethical landscape of artificial intelligence in radiography: a cross-sectional study of radiographers' perspectives

BACKGROUND

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiography presents transformative opportunities for diagnostic imaging and introduces complex ethical considerations. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore radiographers' perspectives on the ethical implications of AI in their field and identify key concerns and potential strategies for addressing them.

METHODS

A structured questionnaire was distributed to a diverse group of radiographers in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire included items on ethical concerns related to AI, the perceived impact on clinical practice, and suggestions for ethical AI integration in radiography. The data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods to capture a broad range of perspectives.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-eight radiographers responded and had varying levels of experience and specializations. Most (44.8%) participants were unfamiliar with the integration of AI into radiography. Approximately 32.9% of radiographers expressed uncertainty regarding the importance of transparency and explanatory capabilities in the AI systems used in radiology. Many (36.9%) participants indicated that they believed that AI systems used in radiology should be transparent and provide justifications for their decision-making procedures. A significant preponderance (44%) of respondents agreed that implementing AI in radiology may increase ethical dilemmas. However, 27.8%expressed uncertainty in recognizing and understanding the potential ethical issues that could arise from integrating AI in radiology. Of the respondents, 41.5% stated that the use of AI in radiology required establishing specific ethical guidelines. However, a significant percentage (28.9%) expressed the opposite opinion, arguing that utilizing AI in radiology does not require adherence to ethical standards. In contrast to the 46.6% of respondents voicing concerns about patient privacy over AI implementation, 41.5% of respondents did not have any such apprehensions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed a complex ethical landscape in the integration of AI in radiography, characterized by enthusiasm and apprehension among professionals. It underscores the necessity for ethical frameworks, education, and policy development to guide the implementation of AI in radiography. These findings contribute to the ongoing discourse on AI in medical imaging and provide insights that can inform policymakers, educators, and practitioners in navigating the ethical challenges of AI adoption in healthcare.

Understanding and Mitigating Bias in Imaging Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms are prone to bias at multiple stages of model development, with potential for exacerbating health disparities. However, bias in imaging AI is a complex topic that encompasses multiple coexisting definitions. Bias may refer to unequal preference to a person or group owing to preexisting attitudes or beliefs, either intentional or unintentional. However, cognitive bias refers to systematic deviation from objective judgment due to reliance on heuristics, and statistical bias refers to differences between true and expected values, commonly manifesting as systematic error in model prediction (ie, a model with output unrepresentative of real-world conditions). Clinical decisions informed by biased models may lead to patient harm due to action on inaccurate AI results or exacerbate health inequities due to differing performance among patient populations. However, while inequitable bias can harm patients in this context, a mindful approach leveraging equitable bias can address underrepresentation of minority groups or rare diseases. Radiologists should also be aware of bias after AI deployment such as automation bias, or a tendency to agree with automated decisions despite contrary evidence. Understanding common sources of imaging AI bias and the consequences of using biased models can guide preventive measures to mitigate its impact. Accordingly, the authors focus on sources of bias at stages along the imaging machine learning life cycle, attempting to simplify potentially intimidating technical terminology for general radiologists using AI tools in practice or collaborating with data scientists and engineers for AI tool development. The authors review definitions of bias in AI, describe common sources of bias, and present recommendations to guide quality control measures to mitigate the impact of bias in imaging AI. Understanding the terms featured in this article will enable a proactive approach to identifying and mitigating bias in imaging AI. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material. See the invited commentary by Rouzrokh and Erickson in this issue.

Understanding Bias in Artificial Intelligence: A Practice Perspective

In the fall of 2021, several experts in this space delivered a Webinar hosted by the American Society of Neuroradiology (ASNR) Diversity and Inclusion Committee, focused on expanding the understanding of bias in artificial intelligence, with a health equity lens, and provided key concepts for neuroradiologists to approach the evaluation of these tools. In this perspective, we distill key parts of this discussion, including understanding why this topic is important to neuroradiologists and lending insight on how neuroradiologists can develop a framework to assess health equity-related bias in artificial intelligence tools. In addition, we provide examples of clinical workflow implementation of these tools so that we can begin to see how artificial intelligence tools will impact discourse on equitable radiologic care. As continuous learners, we must be engaged in new and rapidly evolving technologies that emerge in our field. The Diversity and Inclusion Committee of the ASNR has addressed this subject matter through its programming content revolving around health equity in neuroradiologic advances.

Artificial intelligence in medicine: mitigating risks and maximizing benefits via quality assurance, quality control, and acceptance testing

The adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in medicine poses challenges to existing clinical workflows. This commentary discusses the necessity of context-specific quality assurance (QA), emphasizing the need for robust QA measures with quality control (QC) procedures that encompass (1) acceptance testing (AT) before clinical use, (2) continuous QC monitoring, and (3) adequate user training. The discussion also covers essential components of AT and QA, illustrated with real-world examples. We also highlight what we see as the shared responsibility of manufacturers or vendors, regulators, healthcare systems, medical physicists, and clinicians to enact appropriate testing and oversight to ensure a safe and equitable transformation of medicine through AI.