Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37418025›Full record

ReviewEuropean radiology2023

Cybersecurity considerations for radiology departments involved with artificial intelligence.

Brendan S Kelly, Conor Quinn, Niamh Belton, Aonghus Lawlor, Ronan P Killeen, James Burrell

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Brendan S KellyDepartment of Radiology, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland. brendanskelly@me.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3449-8017
Conor QuinnCybersecurity, Boston College, Boston, MA, USA.
Niamh BeltonInsight Centre for Data Analytics, UCD, Dublin, Ireland.
Aonghus LawlorInsight Centre for Data Analytics, UCD, Dublin, Ireland.
Ronan P KilleenDepartment of Radiology, St Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
James BurrellInformation and Computer Science, University of Hawaii, Manoa, HI, USA.
University College Dublin · IEBoston College · USUniversity of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa · US

Funding

Science Foundation Ireland SFI/12/RC/2289_P2Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 203930/B/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiology artificial intelligence (AI) projects involve the integration of integrating numerous medical devices, wireless technologies, data warehouses, and social networks. While cybersecurity threats are not new to healthcare, their prevalence has increased with the rise of AI research for applications in radiology, making them one of the major healthcare risks of 2021. Radiologists have extensive experience with the interpretation of medical imaging data but radiologists may not have the required level of awareness or training related to AI-specific cybersecurity concerns. Healthcare providers and device manufacturers can learn from other industry sector industries that have already taken steps to improve their cybersecurity systems. This review aims to introduce cybersecurity concepts as it relates to medical imaging and to provide background information on general and healthcare-specific cybersecurity challenges. We discuss approaches to enhancing the level and effectiveness of security through detection and prevention techniques, as well as ways that technology can improve security while mitigating risks. We first review general cybersecurity concepts and regulatory issues before examining these topics in the context of radiology AI, with a specific focus on data, training, data, training, implementation, and auditability. Finally, we suggest potential risk mitigation strategies. By reading this review, healthcare providers, researchers, and device developers can gain a better understanding of the potential risks associated with radiology AI projects, as well as strategies to improve cybersecurity and reduce potential associated risks. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This review can aid radiologists' and related professionals' understanding of the potential cybersecurity risks associated with radiology AI projects, as well as strategies to improve security. KEY POINTS: • Embarking on a radiology artificial intelligence (AI) project is complex and not without risk especially as cybersecurity threats have certainly become more abundant in the healthcare industry. • Fortunately healthcare providers and device manufacturers have the advantage of being able to take inspiration from other industry sectors who are leading the way in the field. • Herein we provide an introduction to cybersecurity as it pertains to radiology, a background to both general and healthcare-specific cybersecurity challenges; we outline general approaches to improving security through both detection and preventative techniques, and instances where technology can increase security while mitigating risks.

Indexed as

RadiologyRadiology Department, HospitalArtificial IntelligenceComputer SecurityHumansRadiologistsArtificial intelligenceCybersecurityRadiology

Identifiers

PMID37418025
PMCPMC10667413
OpenAlexW4383480960

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.