ArticleChest2024
Nonradiology Health Care Professionals Significantly Benefit From AI Assistance in Emergency-Related Chest Radiography Interpretation.
Article in Chest, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence as a second reader for pneumothorax detection: redirecting rather than reducing chest CT use.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Human-AI Collaboration in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- [Artificial intelligence in surgical disciplines: Clinical application, advantages, and potential-a Delphi expert consensus].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing Quality of Care in Nursing Homes: A Rapid Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evaluation framework for assessing the quality and safety of artificial intelligence solutions for the acute care surgeon: a narrative review from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma quality, safety, and outcomes committee.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2026Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of AI in chest radiography for pneumonia and lung cancer: A meta-analysis.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
- Evaluating the impact of AI assistance on decision-making in emergency doctors interpreting chest X-rays: a multi-reader multi-case study.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2025Article
- Influence of content-based image retrieval on the accuracy and inter-reader agreement of usual interstitial pneumonia CT pattern classification.European radiology · 2025Article
- Threshold optimization in AI chest radiography analysis: integrating real-world data and clinical subgroups.European radiology experimental · 2025Article
- Worthwhile or Not? The Pain-Gain Ratio of Screening Routine cMRIs in a Maximum Care University Hospital for Incidental Intracranial Aneurysms Using Artificial Intelligence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Automated spinopelvic measurements on radiographs with artificial intelligence: a multi-reader study.La Radiologia medica · 2025Article
- Evaluation of AI-Powered Routine Screening of Clinically Acquired cMRIs for Incidental Intracranial Aneurysms.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-based rapid brain volumetry substantially improves differential diagnosis in dementia.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest radiographs (CXRs) are still of crucial importance in primary diagnostics, but their interpretation poses difficulties at times. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a convolutional neural network-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that interprets CXRs add value in an emergency unit setting? STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsA total of 563 CXRs acquired in the emergency unit of a major university hospital were retrospectively assessed twice by three board-certified radiologists, three radiology residents, and three emergency unit-experienced nonradiology residents (NRRs). They used a two-step reading process: (1) without AI support; and (2) with AI support providing additional images with AI overlays. Suspicion of four suspected pathologies (pleural effusion, pneumothorax, consolidations suspicious for pneumonia, and nodules) was reported on a five-point confidence scale. Confidence scores of the board-certified radiologists were converted into four binary reference standards of different sensitivities. Performance by radiology residents and NRRs without AI support/with AI support were statistically compared by using receiver-operating characteristics (ROCs), Youden statistics, and operating point metrics derived from fitted ROC curves.
resultsNRRs could significantly improve performance, sensitivity, and accuracy with AI support in all four pathologies tested. In the most sensitive reference standard (reference standard IV), NRR consensus improved the area under the ROC curve (mean, 95% CI) in the detection of the time-critical pathology pneumothorax from 0.846 (0.785-0.907) without AI support to 0.974 (0.947-1.000) with AI support (P < .001), which represented a gain of 30% in sensitivity and 2% in accuracy (while maintaining an optimized specificity). The most pronounced effect was observed in nodule detection, with NRR with AI support improving sensitivity by 53% and accuracy by 7% (area under the ROC curve without AI support, 0.723 [0.661-0.785]; with AI support, 0.890 [0.848-0.931]; P < .001). Radiology residents had smaller, mostly nonsignificant gains in performance, sensitivity, and accuracy with AI support.
interpretationWe found that in an emergency unit setting without 24/7 radiology coverage, the presented AI solution features an excellent clinical support tool to nonradiologists, similar to a second reader, and allows for a more accurate primary diagnosis and thus earlier therapy initiation.
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.