Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
J Digit Imaging ; 36(1): 1-10, 2023 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36316619

RESUMO

The existing fellowship imaging informatics curriculum, established in 2004, has not undergone formal revision since its inception and inaccurately reflects present-day radiology infrastructure. It insufficiently equips trainees for today's informatics challenges as current practices require an understanding of advanced informatics processes and more complex system integration. We sought to address this issue by surveying imaging informatics fellowship program directors across the country to determine the components and cutline for essential topics in a standardized imaging informatics curriculum, the consensus on essential versus supplementary knowledge, and the factors individual programs may use to determine if a newly developed topic is an essential topic. We further identified typical program structural elements and sought fellowship director consensus on offering official graduate trainee certification to imaging informatics fellows. Here, we aim to provide an imaging informatics fellowship director consensus on topics considered essential while still providing a framework for informatics fellowship programs to customize their individual curricula.


Assuntos
Educação de Pós-Graduação em Medicina , Bolsas de Estudo , Humanos , Educação de Pós-Graduação em Medicina/métodos , Consenso , Currículo , Diagnóstico por Imagem , Inquéritos e Questionários
2.
Radiology ; 301(3): 692-699, 2021 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34581608

RESUMO

Background Previous studies suggest that use of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms as diagnostic aids may improve the quality of skeletal age assessment, though these studies lack evidence from clinical practice. Purpose To compare the accuracy and interpretation time of skeletal age assessment on hand radiograph examinations with and without the use of an AI algorithm as a diagnostic aid. Materials and Methods In this prospective randomized controlled trial, the accuracy of skeletal age assessment on hand radiograph examinations was performed with (n = 792) and without (n = 739) the AI algorithm as a diagnostic aid. For examinations with the AI algorithm, the radiologist was shown the AI interpretation as part of their routine clinical work and was permitted to accept or modify it. Hand radiographs were interpreted by 93 radiologists from six centers. The primary efficacy outcome was the mean absolute difference between the skeletal age dictated into the radiologists' signed report and the average interpretation of a panel of four radiologists not using a diagnostic aid. The secondary outcome was the interpretation time. A linear mixed-effects regression model with random center- and radiologist-level effects was used to compare the two experimental groups. Results Overall mean absolute difference was lower when radiologists used the AI algorithm compared with when they did not (5.36 months vs 5.95 months; P = .04). The proportions at which the absolute difference exceeded 12 months (9.3% vs 13.0%, P = .02) and 24 months (0.5% vs 1.8%, P = .02) were lower with the AI algorithm than without it. Median radiologist interpretation time was lower with the AI algorithm than without it (102 seconds vs 142 seconds, P = .001). Conclusion Use of an artificial intelligence algorithm improved skeletal age assessment accuracy and reduced interpretation times for radiologists, although differences were observed between centers. Clinical trial registration no. NCT03530098 © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Rubin in this issue.


Assuntos
Determinação da Idade pelo Esqueleto/métodos , Inteligência Artificial , Interpretação de Imagem Radiográfica Assistida por Computador/métodos , Radiografia/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Radiologistas , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
3.
J Am Coll Radiol ; 17(11): 1405-1409, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33035503

RESUMO

Many radiologists are considering investments in artificial intelligence (AI) to improve the quality of care for our patients. This article outlines considerations for the purchasing process beginning with performance evaluation. Practices should decide whether there is a need to independently verify performance or accept vendor-provided data. Successful implementations will consider who will receive AI results, how results will be presented, and the impact on efficiency. The article provides education on infrastructure considerations including the benefits and drawbacks of best-of-breed and platform approaches in addition to highly specialized server requirements like graphical processing unit availability. Finally, the article presents financial and quality and safety considerations, some of which are unique to AI. Examples include whether additional revenue could be obtained, as in the case of mammography, and whether an AI model unintentionally leads to reinforcing healthcare disparities.


Assuntos
Inteligência Artificial , Radiologistas , Humanos , Mamografia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA