Search

The introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) into radiology promises to enhance efficiency and improve diagnostic accuracy, yet it also raises manifold ethical questions. These include data protection issues, the future role of radiologists, liability when using AI systems, and the avoidance of bias. To prevent data bias, the datasets need to be compiled carefully and to be representative of the target population. Accordingly, the upcoming European Union AI act sets particularly high requirements for the datasets used in training medical AI systems. Cognitive bias occurs when radiologists place too much trust in the results provided by AI systems (overreliance). So far, diagnostic AI systems are used almost exclusively as "second look" systems. If diagnostic AI systems are to be used in the future as "first look" systems or even as autonomous AI systems in order to enhance efficiency in radiology, the question of liability needs to be addressed, comparable to liability for autonomous driving. Such use of AI would also significantly change the role of radiologists., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature.)

Background: The accuracy and completeness of self-disclosures by authors of imaging guidelines are not well known., Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of financial disclosures by US authors of ACR appropriateness criteria., Methods: We reviewed financial disclosures provided by US-based authors of all ACR-AC published in 2019, 2021 and 2023. For each US- based author, payment reports were extracted from the Open Payments Database (OPD) in the previous 36 months related to general category and research payments categories. We analyzed each author individually to determine if the reported disclosures matched results from OPD., Results: A total of 633 authorships, including 333 unique authors were included from 38 ACR AC articles in 2019, with 606 authorships (387 unique authors) from 35 ACR-AC articles published in 2021, and 540 authorships (367 unique authors) from 32 ACR AC articles published in 2023. Among authors who received industry payments, failure to disclose any financial relationship was seen in 125/147 unique authors in 2019, 142/148 authors in 2021 and 95/125 unique authors in 2023. The proportion of nondisclosed total value of payments was 86.1% in 2019, 88.6% in 2021 and 56.7% in 2023. General category payments were nondisclosed in 94.1% in 2019, 89.7% in 2021 and 94.4% in 2023 by payment value., Conclusion: Industry payments to authors of radiology guidelines are common and frequently undisclosed., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Association of University Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to change much about the way we practice radiology in the near future. The power of AI tools has the potential to offer substantial benefit to patients. Conversely, there are dangers inherent in the deployment of AI in radiology, if this is done without regard to possible ethical risks. Some ethical issues are obvious; others are less easily discerned, and less easily avoided. This paper explains some of the ethical difficulties of which we are presently aware, and some of the measures we may take to protect against misuse of AI.

Recent trends in medical decision-making have moved from paternalistic doctor-patient relations to shared decision-making. Informed consent is fundamental to this process and to ensuring patients' ongoing trust in the health-care profession. It cannot be assumed that patients consent to the risk associated with medical exposures, unless they have been provided with the information to make that decision. This position is supported by both the legal and ethical framework around Radiation Protection detailed in this commentary.

Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to change much about the way we practice radiology in the near future. The power of AI tools has the potential to offer substantial benefit to patients. Conversely, there are dangers inherent in the deployment of AI in radiology, if this is done without regard to possible ethical risks. Some ethical issues are obvious; others are less easily discerned, and less easily avoided. This paper explains some of the ethical difficulties of which we are presently aware, and some of the measures we may take to protect against misuse of AI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With artificial intelligence (AI) precipitously perched at the apex of the hype curve, the promise of transforming the disparate fields of healthcare, finance, journalism, and security and law enforcement, among others, is enormous. For healthcare - particularly radiology - AI is anticipated to facilitate improved diagnostics, workflow, and therapeutic planning and monitoring. And, while it is also causing some trepidation among radiologists regarding its uncertain impact on the demand and training of our current and future workforce, most of us welcome the potential to harness AI for transformative improvements in our ability to diagnose disease more accurately and earlier in the populations we serve., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

This is a condensed summary of an international multisociety statement on ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology produced by the ACR, European Society of Radiology, RSNA, Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine, European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Canadian Association of Radiologists, and American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AI has great potential to increase efficiency and accuracy throughout radiology, but it also carries inherent pitfalls and biases. Widespread use of AI-based intelligent and autonomous systems in radiology can increase the risk of systemic errors with high consequence and highlights complex ethical and societal issues. Currently, there is little experience using AI for patient care in diverse clinical settings. Extensive research is needed to understand how to best deploy AI in clinical practice. This statement highlights our consensus that ethical use of AI in radiology should promote well-being, minimize harm, and ensure that the benefits and harms are distributed among stakeholders in a just manner. We believe AI should respect human rights and freedoms, including dignity and privacy. It should be designed for maximum transparency and dependability. Ultimate responsibility and accountability for AI remains with its human designers and operators for the foreseeable future. The radiology community should start now to develop codes of ethics and practice for AI that promote any use that helps patients and the common good and should block use of radiology data and algorithms for financial gain without those two attributes., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims and Objectives: This study aimed to analyse the key factors that influence the overimaging using X-ray such as self-referral, defensive medicine and duplicate imaging studies and to emphasize the ethical problem that derives from it., Materials and Methods: In this study, we focused on the more frequent sources of overdiagnosis such as the total-body CT, proposed in the form of screening in both public and private sector, the choice of the most sensitive test for each pathology such as pulmonary embolism, ultrasound investigations mostly of the thyroid and of the prostate and MR examinations, especially of the musculoskeletal system., Results: The direct follow of overdiagnosis and overimaging is the increase in the risk of contrast media infusion, radiant damage, and costs in the worldwide healthcare system. The theme of the costs of overdiagnosis is strongly related to inappropriate or poorly appropriate imaging examination., Conclusions: We underline the ethical imperatives of trust and right conduct, because the major ethical problems in radiology emerge in the justification of medical exposures of patients in the practice. A close cooperation and collaboration across all the physicians responsible for patient care in requiring imaging examination is also important, balancing possible ionizing radiation disadvantages and patient benefits in terms of care.

Artificial intelligence (AI) software that analyzes medical images is becoming increasingly prevalent. Unlike earlier generations of AI software, which relied on expert knowledge to identify imaging features, machine learning approaches automatically learn to recognize these features. However, the promise of accurate personalized medicine can only be fulfilled with access to large quantities of medical data from patients. This data could be used for purposes such as predicting disease, diagnosis, treatment optimization, and prognostication. Radiology is positioned to lead development and implementation of AI algorithms and to manage the associated ethical and legal challenges. This white paper from the Canadian Association of Radiologists provides a framework for study of the legal and ethical issues related to AI in medical imaging, related to patient data (privacy, confidentiality, ownership, and sharing); algorithms (levels of autonomy, liability, and jurisprudence); practice (best practices and current legal framework); and finally, opportunities in AI from the perspective of a universal health care system., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The rapid development of information technology and data processing capabilities has led to the creation of new tools known as artificial intelligence (AI). Medical applications of AI are emerging, and the French radiology community felt it was therefore timely to issue a position paper on AI as part of its role as a leader in the development of digital projects. Essential information about the application of AI to radiology includes a description of the available algorithms with a glossary; a review of the issues raised by healthcare data, notably those pertaining to imaging (imaging data and co-variables, metadata); a look at research and innovation; an overview of current and future applications; a discussion of AI education; and a scrutiny of ethical issues. In addition to the principles set forth at the Asilomar Conference on Beneficial AI, the French radiology community has developed ten principles aimed at governing the use and development of AI tools in a manner that will create a concerted approach centered on benefits to patients, while also ensuring good integration within clinical workflows. High-quality care in radiology and opportunities for managing large datasets are two avenues relevant to the development of a precision, personalized, and participative radiology practice characterized by improved predictive and preventive capabilities., (Copyright © 2018 Soci showét showé françaises de radiologie. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

The introduction of novel diagnostic techniques in clinical domains such as genomics and radiology has led to a rich ethical debate on how to handle unsolicited findings that result from these innovations. Yet while unsolicited findings arise in both genomics and radiology, most of the relevant literature to date has tended to focus on only one of these domains. In this article, we synthesize and critically assess similarities and differences between "scanning the body" and "sequencing the genome" from an ethical perspective. After briefly describing the novel diagnostic contexts leading to unsolicited findings, we synthesize and reflect on six core ethical issues that relate to both specialties: terminology; benefits and risks; autonomy; disclosure of unsolicited findings to children; uncertainty; and filters and routine screening. We identify ethical rationales that pertain to both fields and may contribute to more ethically sound policies. Considerations of preserving public trust and ensuring that people perceive healthcare policies as fair also support the need for a combined debate., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess medical ethics knowledge among trainees and practicing radiologists through an online survey that included questions about the American College of Radiology Code of Ethics and the American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics., Conclusion: Most survey respondents reported that they had never read the American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics or the American College of Radiology Code of Ethics (77.2% and 67.4% of respondents, respectively). With regard to ethics education during medical school and residency, 57.3% and 70.0% of respondents, respectively, found such education to be insufficient. Medical ethics training should be highlighted during residency, at specialty society meetings, and in journals and online resources for radiologists.

In the last century, rapidly advancing technological innovations have become essential components of modern healthcare, increasing the frequency and necessity of interactions between physicians and industry. These interactions have the potential to bias objectivity and should be approached carefully. A recent JACR article by Harvey et al, highlighted 2014 CMS data, which reported that only 4% of radiologists had interactions with industry, coming in second lowest amongst all 19 reported specialties. However, when managed appropriately, physician-industry relationships can mutually benefit patients, research, payers, providers, hospitals and the medical industry. In order to maintain relevance in the evolving healthcare landscape, it is imperative that radiologists establish, maintain, and expand relationships with industry. To help providers work within the ethical safety of institutional guidelines, while still promoting innovation, we propose a methodical approach with 7 key components to consider when developing appropriate physician-industry relationships or evaluating new products., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Considering the ethics of each profession is important as inter-professional collaboration increases. Professional ethics creates a basis for radiographers' work, as it includes values and principles, together with rights and duties that guide and support professionals. However, little is known about radiographers' rights when it comes to professional ethics., The Aim: The aim of this study was to describe radiographers' perceptions and experiences of their professional rights. The ultimate aim was to increase the understanding of professional ethics in this context and support radiographers' ethical pondering in diagnostic radiography., Methodology: A qualitative method was used. Semistructured group interviews with 15 radiographers were conducted in spring 2013 at two publicly provided diagnostic imaging departments in Finland. Data were analysed by inductive content analysis. All the participants were women, and they had worked as radiographers for an average of 18 years., Findings: Based on our analysis, radiographers' professional rights consisted of rights related to their expertise in radiography and the rights related to working conditions that ensured their wellbeing. Expertise-based rights included rights to plan, conduct and assess radiological care with patient advocacy. Radiographers have the right to contribute to a culture of safe radiation in their organisation and to use their professional knowledge to achieve their main target, which is the safe imaging of patients. Radiographers also have right to work in conditions that support their well-being, including the legal rights stated in their employment contract, as well as their rights concerning resources at work., Conclusions: Radiographers' professional rights are an elementary and multidimensional part of their clinical practice. In future, more theoretical and empirical research is needed to deepen the understanding of their rights in the clinical practice and support radiographers on issues related to this aspect of their work., (© 2016 Nordic College of Caring Science.)

The authors explore the benefits and risks of not reporting imaging findings that do not have clinical relevance, with the goal of developing recommendations to reduce their reporting. The authors review the example of incidentally detected, simple renal cysts (Bosniak category I), including medicolegal conditions required for such a shift in reporting practices to be acceptable. The authors propose four potential criteria for not reporting clinically unimportant findings and recommend that these criteria be debated in other contexts, so that they can be refined and implemented., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

New Zealand patients have rights in relation to their healthcare including the right to consent to medical treatment. Medical imaging is the third largest category of hospital procedure in New Zealand and it constitutes a circumstance where examination without consent could be assault. New Zealand assault law is unique, and medical radiation technologists (MRTs) must be educated about their responsibilities. A literature review was conducted focusing on the medicolegal aspects of consent as it relates to medical imaging. This was compared to the practical realities of practicing radiography as experienced by the author. Finally, the guidance given by the professional bodies for MRTs in New Zealand was examined to determine whether it adequately informs MRTs of the responsibilities and provides them with a framework to guide their practice. Medical imaging is a diverse area presenting a range of challenging circumstances for consent. Currently, the consent framework and guidance provided by professional bodies is insufficient and in need of updating.

Modern radiology is at the forefront of technological progress in medicine, a position that often places unique challenges on its professional character. This article uses "Medical Professionalism in the New Millennium: A Physician Charter," a document published in 2002 and endorsed by several major radiology organizations, as a lens for exploring professional challenges in modern radiology. The three main tenets of the Charter emphasize patient welfare, patient autonomy, and the reduction of disparities in health care distribution. This article reviews the ways in which modern technology and financial structures potentially create stressors on professionalism in radiology, while highlighting the opportunities they provide for radiologists seeking to fulfill the professional goals articulated in the Charter. Picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) and voice recognition systems have transformed the speed of radiology and enhanced the ability of radiologists to improve patient care but also have brought new tensions to the workplace. Although teleradiology may improve global access to radiologists, it may also promote the commoditization of radiology, which diminishes the professional stature of radiologists. Social media and patient portals provide radiologists with new forums for interacting with the public and patients, potentially promoting patient welfare. However, patient privacy and autonomy are important considerations. Finally, modern financial structures provide radiologists with both entrepreneurial opportunities as well as the temptation for unprofessional conduct. Each of these advances carries the potential for professional growth while testing the professional stature of radiology. By considering the risks and benefits of emerging technologies in the modern radiology world, radiologists can chart an ethical and professional future path., (© RSNA, 2015.)

Radiologists are faced with ever-increasing challenges in the needs of the practice, in both private and academic settings. Targeted information about protecting and maintaining the physical, mental, and emotional health of the radiologist is highly limited. Impairment is a functional classification that implies that the individual affected by a disease is unable to perform specific activities. Radiologists can suffer from the same illnesses as any human being, which include substance abuse and addiction, as well as chronic infectious diseases such as human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B and C, and tuberculosis. This article is intended to educate radiologists and leaders about various forms of physician impairment. It provides discussion of the challenges related to such impairment and provides tools and resources to address the impaired radiologist., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In recent years, formal professionalism education, training, and assessment have been introduced to medical schools and accredited residency training programs. Current constructs of medical professionalism characterize it as a multidimensional competency rather than a trait. Medical professionalism is a belief system for organizing and delivering care, in which group members (medical professionals) promise patients and the public that they will self-regulate (ie, ensure that medical professionals live up to standards of competence and ethical values). Physicians who are good professionals have lapses in professionalism. Responses to professional lapses should focus on remediation. Failure of groups of professionals to enforce the standards and values can convey to patients and the public a lack of trustworthiness and thereby undermine the foundation of professionalism, the social contract. The Physician Charter sets forth the 3 fundamental principles and 10 commitments that offer guidance in some of the most challenging situations. One example is illustrated herein and is continued from Part 1 of this two-part series.

Professionalism has been described as the "basis of medicine's contract with society." This article reviews the foundational principles of medical professionalism and, more specifically, defines the nature and scope of radiologists' responsibilities to patients. In the face of ongoing changes in the environment of medical practice, maintenance of professionalism is an adaptive challenge that will require successful practitioners to be open to and actively engaged in continuous learning and self-improvement. Imaging 3.0 is a change process developed by the American College of Radiology to help radiologists redefine and reprioritize their professional activities as the discipline transitions from a volume-based to value-based specialty.

Many previous studies have shown that nonradiologist physicians who can refer advanced MRI and CT examinations to themselves or within their practices use these modalities at a much higher rate than those who refer their examinations to unaffiliated radiology facilities. This led Maryland to pass a unique self-referral law in 1993 to directly address self-referred advanced imaging. The authors discuss the politics and economics of self-referral and provide a comprehensive review of the creation, progression, and impact of this landmark law., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)