Background <p>The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiological applications is continuously increasing, making AI tools entrenched deeper and deeper into the medical workflow. Given that clinical studies, and more specifically randomized clinical trials offer a more reliable picture on the value proposition that AI brings to radiologists, the current paper is focused on the evidence supplied by such studies.</p> Methods <p>Search for relevant clinical studies and trials was conducted both using Pubmed/Medline for completed trials with results published over the past 7 years, and the clinicaltrials.gov website for ongoing or newly registered clinical studies.</p> Results <p>Use of AI shows 21%-53% reduction in screen-reading time, 20% advancement in reading confidence and 9%-20% increased performance in lesion characterizations. Differential diagnosis shows notable improvement compared to junior medical professionals and modest gains when compared to senior experts.</p> Conclusions <p>AI is a great tool to assist the medical profession, reducing time needed to express expert opinions and helping junior professionals to gain experience and confidence. Currently AI does not provide improvements over standard of care when used as a single tool, without human involvement.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Examining the role of AI in cancer imaging through the lens of clinical studies

  • Loredana G. Marcu,
  • David C. Marcu

摘要

Background

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiological applications is continuously increasing, making AI tools entrenched deeper and deeper into the medical workflow. Given that clinical studies, and more specifically randomized clinical trials offer a more reliable picture on the value proposition that AI brings to radiologists, the current paper is focused on the evidence supplied by such studies.

Methods

Search for relevant clinical studies and trials was conducted both using Pubmed/Medline for completed trials with results published over the past 7 years, and the clinicaltrials.gov website for ongoing or newly registered clinical studies.

Results

Use of AI shows 21%-53% reduction in screen-reading time, 20% advancement in reading confidence and 9%-20% increased performance in lesion characterizations. Differential diagnosis shows notable improvement compared to junior medical professionals and modest gains when compared to senior experts.

Conclusions

AI is a great tool to assist the medical profession, reducing time needed to express expert opinions and helping junior professionals to gain experience and confidence. Currently AI does not provide improvements over standard of care when used as a single tool, without human involvement.