Artificial intelligence in radiology: 173 commercially available products and their scientific evidence.

Authors

Antonissen N,Tryfonos O,Houben IB,Jacobs C,de Rooij M,van Leeuwen KG

Affiliations (6)

  • Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. [email protected].
  • Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, European University Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus.
  • Department of Medical Imaging, Isala, The Netherlands.
  • Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Romion Health, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Health AI Register, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Abstract

To assess changes in peer-reviewed evidence on commercially available radiological artificial intelligence (AI) products from 2020 to 2023, as a follow-up to a 2020 review of 100 products. A literature review was conducted, covering January 2015 to March 2023, focusing on CE-certified radiological AI products listed on www.healthairegister.com . Papers were categorised using the hierarchical model of efficacy: technical/diagnostic accuracy (levels 1-2), clinical decision-making and patient outcomes (levels 3-5), or socio-economic impact (level 6). Study features such as design, vendor independence, and multicentre/multinational data usage were also examined. By 2023, 173 CE-certified AI products from 90 vendors were identified, compared to 100 products in 2020. Products with peer-reviewed evidence increased from 36% to 66%, supported by 639 papers (up from 237). Diagnostic accuracy studies (level 2) remained predominant, though their share decreased from 65% to 57%. Studies addressing higher-efficacy levels (3-6) remained constant at 22% and 24%, with the number of products supported by such evidence increasing from 18% to 31%. Multicentre studies rose from 30% to 41% (p < 0.01). However, vendor-independent studies decreased (49% to 45%), as did multinational studies (15% to 11%) and prospective designs (19% to 16%), all with p > 0.05. The increase in peer-reviewed evidence and higher levels of evidence per product indicate maturation in the radiological AI market. However, the continued focus on lower-efficacy studies and reductions in vendor independence, multinational data, and prospective designs highlight persistent challenges in establishing unbiased, real-world evidence. Question Evaluating advancements in peer-reviewed evidence for CE-certified radiological AI products is crucial to understand their clinical adoption and impact. Findings CE-certified AI products with peer-reviewed evidence increased from 36% in 2020 to 66% in 2023, but the proportion of higher-level evidence papers (~24%) remained unchanged. Clinical relevance The study highlights increased validation of radiological AI products but underscores a continued lack of evidence on their clinical and socio-economic impact, which may limit these tools' safe and effective implementation into clinical workflows.

Topics

Journal Article

Ready to Sharpen Your Edge?

Join hundreds of your peers who rely on RadAI Slice. Get the essential weekly briefing that empowers you to navigate the future of radiology.

We respect your privacy. Unsubscribe at any time.