ArticleEmergency medicine journal : EMJ2024
Evaluation of the impact of artificial intelligence-assisted image interpretation on the diagnostic performance of clinicians in identifying pneumothoraces on plain chest X-ray: a multi-case multi-reader study.
Article in Emergency medicine journal : EMJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence as a second reader for pneumothorax detection: redirecting rather than reducing chest CT use.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Editorial Policies on Artificial Intelligence in Plastic Surgery Publishing: Current Landscape and Future Directions.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Patient and staff acceptability of an artificial intelligence software to prioritize chest X-rays in an NHS setting: a qualitative evaluation.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Chest X-Ray evaluation using GPT for tube thoracostomy or conservative care in non-tension spontaneous pneumothorax.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Artificial intelligence-assisted reader evaluation in acute CT head interpretation (AI-REACT): a multireader multicase study.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- AI assistance improves reader agreement in digital mammography: A multireader crossover study of general and breast subspecialty radiologists.Scientific reports · 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
- Impact of AI Assistance in Pneumothorax Detection on Chest Radiographs Among Readers of Varying Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the impact of artificial intelligence-assisted image interpretation on the diagnostic performance of clinicians in identifying endotracheal tube position on plain chest X-ray: a multi-case multi-reader study.Critical care (London, England) · 2025Article
- Development of an AI model for pneumothorax imaging: Dataset and model optimization strategies for real-world deployment.European journal of radiology open · 2025Article
- Patient Triage and Guidance in Emergency Departments Using Large Language Models: Multimetric Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for diagnostics in radiology practice: a rapid systematic scoping review.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted chest radiograph interpretation in Role 2 military field hospital settings: a controlled experimental study.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2025Article
- Adoption, orchestration, and deployment of artificial intelligence within the National Health Service-facilitators and barriers: an expert roundtable discussion.BJR artificial intelligence · 2024Review
- Mapping artificial intelligence models in emergency medicine: A scoping review on artificial intelligence performance in emergency care and education.Turkish journal of emergency medicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
33 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI)-assisted image interpretation is a fast-developing area of clinical innovation. Most research to date has focused on the performance of AI-assisted algorithms in comparison with that of radiologists rather than evaluating the algorithms' impact on the clinicians who often undertake initial image interpretation in routine clinical practice. This study assessed the impact of AI-assisted image interpretation on the diagnostic performance of frontline acute care clinicians for the detection of pneumothoraces (PTX).
methodsA multicentre blinded multi-case multi-reader study was conducted between October 2021 and January 2022. The online study recruited 18 clinician readers from six different clinical specialties, with differing levels of seniority, across four English hospitals. The study included 395 plain CXR images, 189 positive for PTX and 206 negative. The reference standard was the consensus opinion of two thoracic radiologists with a third acting as arbitrator. General Electric Healthcare Critical Care Suite (GEHC CCS) PTX algorithm was applied to the final dataset. Readers individually interpreted the dataset without AI assistance, recording the presence or absence of a PTX and a confidence rating. Following a 'washout' period, this process was repeated including the AI output.
resultsAnalysis of the performance of the algorithm for detecting or ruling out a PTX revealed an overall AUROC of 0.939. Overall reader sensitivity increased by 11.4% (95% CI 4.8, 18.0, p=0.002) from 66.8% (95% CI 57.3, 76.2) unaided to 78.1% aided (95% CI 72.2, 84.0, p=0.002), specificity 93.9% (95% CI 90.9, 97.0) without AI to 95.8% (95% CI 93.7, 97.9, p=0.247). The junior reader subgroup showed the largest improvement at 21.7% (95% CI 10.9, 32.6), increasing from 56.0% (95% CI 37.7, 74.3) to 77.7% (95% CI 65.8, 89.7, p<0.01).
conclusionThe study indicates that AI-assisted image interpretation significantly enhances the diagnostic accuracy of clinicians in detecting PTX, particularly benefiting less experienced practitioners. While overall interpretation time remained unchanged, the use of AI improved diagnostic confidence and sensitivity, especially among junior clinicians. These findings underscore the potential of AI to support less skilled clinicians in acute care settings.
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.