A South Korean study finds that AI-generated chest x-ray reports are nearly as clinically acceptable as radiologist-written reports under standard criteria.
Key Details
- 1AI-generated and radiologist-written reports showed similar acceptability under a standard criterion: 88.4% vs 89.2% (p = 0.36).
- 2Under a more stringent criterion (acceptable without revision), AI was less acceptable: 66.8% vs 75.7% (p < 0.001).
- 3The model (KARA-CXR) was trained on 8.8 million chest x-rays from 42 institutions across South Korea and the U.S.
- 4AI-generated reports demonstrated higher sensitivity for referable abnormalities (81.2% vs 59.4%) but lower specificity (81% vs 93.6%) compared to radiologists.
- 5Seven thoracic radiologists independently evaluated report acceptability; most felt AI was not yet ready to replace human radiologists.
- 6Editorials note AI is diagnostically positioned between residents and board-certified radiologists.
Why It Matters
This study demonstrates that AI-generated reporting can meet foundational quality standards, highlighting its potential for expediting workflow in busy or resource-constrained environments. However, the nuanced limitations under more stringent criteria suggest further development is needed for AI to match board-certified radiologist standards.
Source
AuntMinnie
Related News
•Radiology Business
AI-Generated Reports Cut Radiology Reading Times and Gain Acceptance
AI-generated reporting significantly reduces radiologists' reading times and increases report acceptability over time.
•AI in Healthcare
Joint Commission Issues AI Guidance; Radiology AI Advancements Highlighted
Joint Commission releases AI safety guidance while major advances surface in predictive and radiology AI models.
•AuntMinnie
AI Outperforms Physicians in Detecting Achalasia on Chest X-Rays
An AI model achieved high accuracy in identifying esophageal achalasia on chest x-rays, surpassing physician performance.