Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
View through CrossRef
Abstract
Objective
To investigate the view of clinicians on diagnostic radiology and its future.
Methods
Corresponding authors who published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet between 2010 and 2022 were asked to participate in a survey about diagnostic radiology and its future.
Results
The 331 participating clinicians gave a median score of 9 on a 0–10 point scale to the value of medical imaging in improving patient-relevant outcomes. 40.6%, 15.1%, 18.9%, and 9.5% of clinicians indicated to interpret more than half of radiography, ultrasonography, CT, and MRI examinations completely by themselves, without consulting a radiologist or reading the radiology report. Two hundred eighty-nine clinicians (87.3%) expected an increase in medical imaging utilization in the coming 10 years, whereas 9 clinicians (2.7%) expected a decrease. The need for diagnostic radiologists in the coming 10 years was expected to increase by 162 clinicians (48.9%), to remain stable by 85 clinicians (25.7%), and to decrease by 47 clinicians (14.2%). Two hundred clinicians (60.4%) expected that artificial intelligence (AI) will not make diagnostic radiologists redundant in the coming 10 years, whereas 54 clinicians (16.3%) thought the opposite.
Conclusion
Clinicians who published in the New England Journal of Medicine or the Lancet attribute high value to medical imaging. They generally need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation, but for a considerable proportion of radiographs, their service is not required. Most expect medical imaging utilization and the need for diagnostic radiologists to increase in the foreseeable future, and do not expect AI to make radiologists redundant.
Clinical relevance statement
The views of clinicians on radiology and its future may be used to determine how radiology should be practiced and be further developed.
Key Points
• Clinicians generally regard medical imaging as high-value care and expect to use more medical imaging in the future.
• Clinicians mainly need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation while they interpret a substantial proportion of radiographs completely by themselves.
• The majority of clinicians expects that the need for diagnostic radiologists will not decrease (half of them even expect that we need more) and does not believe that AI will replace radiologists.
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Title: Diagnostic radiology and its future: what do clinicians need and think?
Description:
Abstract
Objective
To investigate the view of clinicians on diagnostic radiology and its future.
Methods
Corresponding authors who published in the New England Journal of Medicine and the Lancet between 2010 and 2022 were asked to participate in a survey about diagnostic radiology and its future.
Results
The 331 participating clinicians gave a median score of 9 on a 0–10 point scale to the value of medical imaging in improving patient-relevant outcomes.
40.
6%, 15.
1%, 18.
9%, and 9.
5% of clinicians indicated to interpret more than half of radiography, ultrasonography, CT, and MRI examinations completely by themselves, without consulting a radiologist or reading the radiology report.
Two hundred eighty-nine clinicians (87.
3%) expected an increase in medical imaging utilization in the coming 10 years, whereas 9 clinicians (2.
7%) expected a decrease.
The need for diagnostic radiologists in the coming 10 years was expected to increase by 162 clinicians (48.
9%), to remain stable by 85 clinicians (25.
7%), and to decrease by 47 clinicians (14.
2%).
Two hundred clinicians (60.
4%) expected that artificial intelligence (AI) will not make diagnostic radiologists redundant in the coming 10 years, whereas 54 clinicians (16.
3%) thought the opposite.
Conclusion
Clinicians who published in the New England Journal of Medicine or the Lancet attribute high value to medical imaging.
They generally need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation, but for a considerable proportion of radiographs, their service is not required.
Most expect medical imaging utilization and the need for diagnostic radiologists to increase in the foreseeable future, and do not expect AI to make radiologists redundant.
Clinical relevance statement
The views of clinicians on radiology and its future may be used to determine how radiology should be practiced and be further developed.
Key Points
• Clinicians generally regard medical imaging as high-value care and expect to use more medical imaging in the future.
• Clinicians mainly need radiologists for cross-sectional imaging interpretation while they interpret a substantial proportion of radiographs completely by themselves.
• The majority of clinicians expects that the need for diagnostic radiologists will not decrease (half of them even expect that we need more) and does not believe that AI will replace radiologists.
Related Results
Suffering of Patients with Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS); The First Qualitative study in TOS
Suffering of Patients with Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome (TOS); The First Qualitative study in TOS
Abstract
Background
Diagnosis of neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (nTOS) is hindered by symptom overlap with cervical radiculopathy, carpal tunnel syndrome, or psychosomatic dis...
Enhancing Clinicians’ Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study (Preprint)
Enhancing Clinicians’ Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study (Preprint)
BACKGROUND
Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for collecting self-reported data among hospital outpatients, clinicians’...
Enhancing Clinicians’ Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study
Enhancing Clinicians’ Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study
Background
Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for collecting self-reported data among hospital outpatients, clinicians’ use of thes...
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ITS ROLE IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ITS ROLE IN CLINICAL PRACTICE
As Artificial intelligence (AI) continues to expand, ingress and impact how clinicians and physicians have worked for centuries. On paper the availability of a technology that is t...
Divergent Conceptualizations and Management Strategies for Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: A Qualitative Multispecialty Study
Divergent Conceptualizations and Management Strategies for Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: A Qualitative Multispecialty Study
Abstract
Background
Neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome (nTOS) is the most prevalent subtype of thoracic outlet syndrome and remains one of the most controversial conditions in per...
Autonomy on Trial
Autonomy on Trial
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
Abstract
This paper critically examines how US bioethics and health law conceptualize patient autonomy, contrasting the rights-based, individualist...
Subspecialisation recognition in European Radiology—follow-up survey by the Accreditation Council in Imaging and European Society of Radiology National Societies Committee
Subspecialisation recognition in European Radiology—follow-up survey by the Accreditation Council in Imaging and European Society of Radiology National Societies Committee
Abstract
Objectives
To assess the status of radiology subspecialisation recognition across Europe, targeting European Society of Radiology (ESR) ...
Postprocedural Interpretation of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography by Radiology
Postprocedural Interpretation of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography by Radiology
BACKGROUND: With the increase in the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (necessitating real-time interpretation), it is unknown whether post-ERCP radiolog...

