ArticleCell reports. Medicine2023
AI-clinician collaboration via disagreement prediction: A decision pipeline and retrospective analysis of real-world radiologist-AI interactions.
Article in Cell reports. Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Realizing the value of the divergence event in clinical human-AI interaction.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- A scoping review of human-AI collaboration patterns and task divisions in healthcare applications.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Progress in the application of machine learning in CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Real-world radiology data for artificial intelligence-driven cancer support systems and biomarker development.ESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2025Review
- Rethinking clinical trials for medical AI with dynamic deployments of adaptive systems.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical decision support tools can improve diagnostic performance or reduce variability, but they are also subject to post-deployment underperformance. Although using AI in an assistive setting offsets many concerns with autonomous AI in medicine, systems that present all predictions equivalently fail to protect against key AI safety concerns. We design a decision pipeline that supports the diagnostic model with an ecosystem of models, integrating disagreement prediction, clinical significance categorization, and prediction quality modeling to guide prediction presentation. We characterize disagreement using data from a deployed chest X-ray interpretation aid and compare clinician burden in this proposed pipeline to the diagnostic model in isolation. The average disagreement rate is 6.5%, and the expected burden reduction is 4.8%, even if 5% of disagreements on urgent findings receive a second read. We conclude that, in our production setting, we can adequately balance risk mitigation with clinician burden if disagreement false positives are reduced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.