Lawrence Rachel, Dodsworth Emma, Massou Efthalia, Sherlaw-Johnson Chris, Ramsay Angus I G, Walton Holly, O'Regan Tracy, Gleeson Fergus, Crellin Nadia, Herbert Kevin, Ng Pei Li, Elphinstone Holly, Mehta Raj, Lloyd Joanne, Halliday Amanda, Morris Stephen, Fulop Naomi J
Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, UK.
Research and Policy, Nuffield Trust, London, UK.
EClinicalMedicine. 2025 May 12;83:103228. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103228. eCollection 2025 May.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this review was to evaluate evidence on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to support diagnostics in radiology, including implementation, experiences, perceptions, quantitative, and cost outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic scoping review (PROSPERO registration: CRD42024537518) and discussed emerging findings with relevant stakeholders (radiology staff, public members) using workshops. We searched four databases and the grey literature for articles published between 1st January 2020 and 31st January 2025. Articles were screened for eligibility ( = 8013), resulting in 140 included studies. Studies evaluated implementation ( = 7), perceptions ( = 74), experiences ( = 14), effectiveness ( = 53), and cost ( = 6). FINDINGS: Factors influencing AI adoption were identified, including the high technical demand, lack of guidance, training/knowledge, transparency, and expert engagement. Evidence demonstrated improvements in diagnostic accuracy and reductions in interpretation time. However, evidence was mixed regarding experiences of using AI, the risk of increasing false positives, and the wider impact of AI on workflow efficiency and cost-effectiveness. INTERPRETATION: The potential benefits of AI are evident, but there is a paucity of evidence in real-world settings, supporting cautiousness in how AI is perceived (e.g., as a complementary tool, not a solution). We outline wider implications for policy and practice and summarise evidence gaps. FUNDING: This project is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (Ref: NIHR156380). NJF and AIGR are supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Central London Patient Safety Research Collaboration and NJF is an NIHR Senior Investigator. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
背景:本综述的目的是评估关于使用人工智能(AI)支持放射学诊断的证据,包括实施情况、经验、看法、定量结果和成本效益。 方法:我们进行了一项系统的范围综述(PROSPERO注册编号:CRD42024537518),并通过研讨会与相关利益相关者(放射科工作人员、公众成员)讨论了新出现的研究结果。我们在四个数据库和灰色文献中搜索了2020年1月1日至2025年1月31日发表的文章。对文章进行了资格筛选(n = 8013),最终纳入140项研究。这些研究评估了实施情况(n = 7)、看法(n = 74)、经验(n = 14)、有效性(n = 53)和成本(n = 6)。 结果:确定了影响人工智能采用的因素,包括高技术要求、缺乏指导、培训/知识、透明度以及专家参与度。有证据表明诊断准确性有所提高,解读时间有所缩短。然而,关于使用人工智能的经验、增加假阳性的风险以及人工智能对工作流程效率和成本效益的更广泛影响,证据并不一致。 解读:人工智能的潜在好处是显而易见的,但在实际应用中证据不足,这支持了在看待人工智能时要谨慎(例如,将其视为一种辅助工具,而非解决方案)。我们概述了对政策和实践的更广泛影响,并总结了证据空白。 资金:本项目由国家卫生与保健研究机构的卫生与社会保健交付研究项目资助(参考编号:NIHR156380)。NJF和AIGR得到了国家卫生研究院(NIHR)伦敦中心患者安全研究合作项目的支持,NJF是NIHR高级研究员。所表达的观点是作者的观点,不一定代表NIHR或卫生与社会保健部的观点。
EClinicalMedicine. 2025-5-12
Health Technol Assess. 2024-1
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025-1
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023-7
Front Psychol. 2023-1-17
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024-10-11