Reporting radiographers' interaction with Artificial Intelligence-How do different forms of AI feedback impact trust and decision switching?

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been increasingly integrated into healthcare settings, including the radiology department to aid radiographic image interpretation, including reporting by radiographers. Trust has been cited as a barrier to effective clinical implementation of AI. Appropriating trust will be important in the future with AI to ensure the ethical use of these systems for the benefit of the patient, clinician and health services. Means of explainable AI, such as heatmaps have been proposed to increase AI transparency and trust by elucidating which parts of image the AI 'focussed on' when making its decision. The aim of this novel study was to quantify the impact of different forms of AI feedback on the expert clinicians' trust. Whilst this study was conducted in the UK, it has potential international application and impact for AI interface design, either globally or in countries with similar cultural and/or economic status to the UK. A convolutional neural network was built for this study; trained, validated and tested on a publicly available dataset of MUsculoskeletal RAdiographs (MURA), with binary diagnoses and Gradient Class Activation Maps (GradCAM) as outputs. Reporting radiographers (n = 12) were recruited to this study from all four regions of the UK. Qualtrics was used to present each participant with a total of 18 complete examinations from the MURA test dataset (each examination contained more than one radiographic image). Participants were presented with the images first, images with heatmaps next and finally an AI binary diagnosis in a sequential order. Perception of trust in the AI systems was obtained following the presentation of each heatmap and binary feedback. The participants were asked to indicate whether they would change their mind (or decision switch) in response to the AI feedback. Participants disagreed with the AI heatmaps for the abnormal examinations 45.8% of the time and agreed with binary feedback on 86.7% of examinations (26/30 presentations).'Only two participants indicated that they would decision switch in response to all AI feedback (GradCAM and binary) (0.7%, n = 2) across all datasets. 22.2% (n = 32) of participants agreed with the localisation of pathology on the heatmap. The level of agreement with the GradCAM and binary diagnosis was found to be correlated with trust (GradCAM:-.515;-.584, significant large negative correlation at 0.01 level (p = < .01 and-.309;-.369, significant medium negative correlation at .01 level (p = < .01) for GradCAM and binary diagnosis respectively). This study shows that the extent of agreement with both AI binary diagnosis and heatmap is correlated with trust in AI for the participants in this study, where greater agreement with the form of AI feedback is associated with greater trust in AI, in particular in the heatmap form of AI feedback. Forms of explainable AI should be developed with cognisance of the need for precision and accuracy in localisation to promote appropriate trust in clinical end users.

An experimental machine learning study investigating the decision-making process of students and qualified radiographers when interpreting radiographic images.

AI is becoming more prevalent in healthcare and is predicted to be further integrated into workflows to ease the pressure on an already stretched service. The National Health Service in the UK has prioritised AI and Digital health as part of its Long-Term Plan. Few studies have examined the human interaction with such systems in healthcare, despite reports of biases being present with the use of AI in other technologically advanced fields, such as finance and aviation. Understanding is needed of how certain user characteristics may impact how radiographers engage with AI systems in use in the clinical setting to mitigate against problems before they arise. The aim of this study is to determine correlations of skills, confidence in AI and perceived knowledge amongst student and qualified radiographers in the UK healthcare system. A machine learning based AI model was built to predict if the interpreter was either a student (n = 67) or a qualified radiographer (n = 39) in advance, using important variables from a feature selection technique named Boruta. A survey, which required the participant to interpret a series of plain radiographic examinations with and without AI assistance, was created on the Qualtrics survey platform and promoted via social media (Twitter/LinkedIn), therefore adopting convenience, snowball sampling This survey was open to all UK radiographers, including students and retired radiographers. Pearson's correlation analysis revealed that males who were proficient in their profession were more likely than females to trust AI. Trust in AI was negatively correlated with age and with level of experience. A machine learning model was built, the best model predicted the image interpreter to be qualified radiographers with 0.93 area under curve and a prediction accuracy of 93%. Further testing in prospective validation cohorts using a larger sample size is required to determine the clinical utility of the proposed machine learning model.

An insight into the current perceptions of UK radiographers on the future impact of AI on the profession: A cross-sectional survey.

INTRODUCTION: As a profession, radiographers have always been keen on adapting and integrating new technologies. The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into clinical practice in the last five years has been met with scepticism by some, who predict the demise of the profession, whilst others suggest a bright future with AI, full of opportunities and synergies. Post COVID-19 pandemic need for economic recovery and a backlog of medical imaging and reporting may accelerate the adoption of AI. It is therefore timely to appreciate practitioners' perceptions of AI used in clinical practice and their perception of the short-term impact on the profession. AIM: This study aims to explore the perceptions of AI in the UK radiography workforce and to investigate its current AI applications and future technological expectations of radiographers. METHODS: An online survey (QualtricsⓇ) was created by a team of radiography AI experts. The survey was disseminated via social media and professional networks in the UK. Demographic information and perceptions of the impact of AI on several aspects of the radiography profession were gathered, including the current use of AI in practice, future expectations and the perceived impact of AI on the profession. RESULTS: 411 responses were collected (80% diagnostic radiographers (DR); 20% therapeutic radiographers (TR)). Awareness of AI used in clinical practice is low, with DR respondents suggesting AI will have the most value/potential in cross sectional imaging and image reporting. TR responses linked AI as having most value in treatment planning, contouring, and image acquisition/matching. Respondents felt that AI will impact radiographers' daily work (DR, 79.6%; TR, 88.9%) by standardising some aspects of patient care and technical factors of radiography practice. A mixed response about impact on careers was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents were unsure about the ways in which AI is currently used in practice and how AI will impact on careers in the future. It was felt that AI integration will lead to increased job opportunities to contribute to decision making as an end user. Job security was not identified as a cause for concern.

Beauty Is in the AI of the Beholder: Are We Ready for the Clinical Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Radiography? An Exploratory Analysis of Perceived AI Knowledge, Skills, Confidence, and Education Perspectives of UK Radiographers.

Introduction: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical imaging and radiotherapy has been met with both scepticism and excitement. However, clinical integration of AI is already well-underway. Many authors have recently reported on the AI knowledge and perceptions of radiologists/medical staff and students however there is a paucity of information regarding radiographers. Published literature agrees that AI is likely to have significant impact on radiology practice. As radiographers are at the forefront of radiology service delivery, an awareness of the current level of their perceived knowledge, skills, and confidence in AI is essential to identify any educational needs necessary for successful adoption into practice. Aim: The aim of this survey was to determine the perceived knowledge, skills, and confidence in AI amongst UK radiographers and highlight priorities for educational provisions to support a digital healthcare ecosystem. Methods: A survey was created on Qualtrics® and promoted via social media (Twitter®/LinkedIn®). This survey was open to all UK radiographers, including students and retired radiographers. Participants were recruited by convenience, snowball sampling. Demographic information was gathered as well as data on the perceived, self-reported, knowledge, skills, and confidence in AI of respondents. Insight into what the participants understand by the term "AI" was gained by means of a free text response. Quantitative analysis was performed using SPSS® and qualitative thematic analysis was performed on NVivo®. Results: Four hundred and eleven responses were collected (80% from diagnostic radiography and 20% from a radiotherapy background), broadly representative of the workforce distribution in the UK. Although many respondents stated that they understood the concept of AI in general (78.7% for diagnostic and 52.1% for therapeutic radiography respondents, respectively) there was a notable lack of sufficient knowledge of AI principles, understanding of AI terminology, skills, and confidence in the use of AI technology. Many participants, 57% of diagnostic and 49% radiotherapy respondents, do not feel adequately trained to implement AI in the clinical setting. Furthermore 52% and 64%, respectively, said they have not developed any skill in AI whilst 62% and 55%, respectively, stated that there is not enough AI training for radiographers. The majority of the respondents indicate that there is an urgent need for further education (77.4% of diagnostic and 73.9% of therapeutic radiographers feeling they have not had adequate training in AI), with many respondents stating that they had to educate themselves to gain some basic AI skills. Notable correlations between confidence in working with AI and gender, age, and highest qualification were reported. Conclusion: Knowledge of AI terminology, principles, and applications by healthcare practitioners is necessary for adoption and integration of AI applications. The results of this survey highlight the perceived lack of knowledge, skills, and confidence for radiographers in applying AI solutions but also underline the need for formalised education on AI to prepare the current and prospective workforce for the upcoming clinical integration of AI in healthcare, to safely and efficiently navigate a digital future. Focus should be given on different needs of learners depending on age, gender, and highest qualification to ensure optimal integration.

An extensive survey of radiographers from the Middle East and India on artificial intelligence integration in radiology practice.

Assessing the current Artificial intelligence (AI) situation is a crucial step towards its implementation into radiology practice. The study aimed to assess radiographer willingness to accept AI in radiology work practice and the impact of AI in work performance. An exploratory cross-sectional online survey conducted for radiographers working within the Middle East and India was conducted from May-August 2020. A previously validated survey used to obtain radiographer's demographics, knowledge, perceptions, organization readiness, and challenges of integrating AI into radiology. The survey was accessible for radiographers and distributed through the societies page. The survey was completed by 549 radiographers distributed as (77.6%, n = 426) from the Middle East while (22.4%, n = 123) from India. A majority (86%, n = 773) agreed that AI currently plays an important role in radiology and (88.0%, n = 483) expected that AI would play a role in radiology practice and image production. The challenges for AI implementation in practice were developing AI skills (42.8%, n = 235) and AI knowledge development (37.0%, n = 203). Participants showed high interest to integrate AI in under and postgraduate curriculum. There is excitement about what AI could offer, but education input is a requirement. Fears are expressed about job security and how radiology may work across all ages and educational backgrounds. Radiographers become aware of AI role and challenges, which can be improved by education and training.

Computing eye gaze metrics for the automatic assessment of radiographer performance during X-ray image interpretation.

AIM: To investigate image interpretation performance by diagnostic radiography students, diagnostic radiographers and reporting radiographers by computing eye gaze metrics using eye tracking technology. METHODS: Three groups of participants were studied during their interpretation of 8 digital radiographic images including the axial and appendicular skeleton, and chest (prevalence of normal images was 12.5%). A total of 464 image interpretations were collected. Participants consisted of 21 radiography students, 19 qualified radiographers and 18 qualified reporting radiographers who were further qualified to report on the musculoskeletal (MSK) system. OUTCOME MEASURES: Eye tracking data was collected using the Tobii X60 eye tracker and subsequently eye gaze metrics were computed. Voice recordings, confidence levels and diagnoses provided a clear demonstration of the image interpretation and the cognitive processes undertaken by each participant. A questionnaire afforded the participants an opportunity to offer information on their experience in image interpretation and their opinion on the eye tracking technology. RESULTS: Reporting radiographers demonstrated a 15% greater accuracy rate (p≤0.001), were more confident (p≤0.001) and took a mean of 2.4s longer to clinically decide on all features compared to students. Reporting radiographers also had a 15% greater accuracy rate (p≤0.001), were more confident (p≤0.001) and took longer to clinically decide on an image diagnosis (p=0.02) than radiographers. Reporting radiographers had a greater mean fixation duration (p=0.01), mean fixation count (p=0.04) and mean visit count (p=0.04) within the areas of pathology compared to students. Eye tracking patterns, presented within heat maps, were a good reflection of group expertise and search strategies. Eye gaze metrics such as time to first fixate, fixation count, fixation duration and visit count within the areas of pathology were indicative of the radiographer's competency. CONCLUSION: The accuracy and confidence of each group could be reflected in the variability of their eye tracking heat maps. Participants' thoughts and decisions were quantified using the eye tracking data. Eye tracking metrics also reflected the different search strategies that each group of participants adopted during their image interpretations. This is the first study to use eye tracking technology to assess image interpretation skills between various groups of different levels of experience in radiography, especially on a combination of the MSK system, chest cavity and a variety of pathologies.