ReviewDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2026
Human-AI interaction and collaboration in radiology: from conceptual frameworks to responsible implementation.
Review in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2026. 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.
- Bias and Fairness Across the Healthcare AI Lifecycle: A Clinician-Oriented Review.Balkan medical journal · 2026Review
- Human-AI Interaction in Interventional Radiology: A Narrative Review of Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- Agentic Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging Education: Architectural Autonomy and the Risk of Cognitive Surrender.Journal of medical radiation sciences · 2026Article
- Improving non-expert performance in musculoskeletal MRI protocoling through a large language model.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advances in Artificial Intelligence for Wrist Joint Injury Diagnosis.International journal of medical sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is entering routine radiology practice, but most studies evaluate algorithms in isolation rather than their interaction with radiologists in clinical workflows. This narrative review summarizes current knowledge on human-AI interaction in radiology and highlights practical risks and opportunities for clinical teams. First, simple conceptual models of human-AI collaboration are described, such as diagnostic complementarity, which explain when radiologists and AI can achieve synergistic performance exceeding that of either alone. Then, AI tool integration strategies along the imaging pathway are reviewed, from acquisition and triage to interpretation, reporting, and teaching, outlining common interaction models and physician-in-the-loop workflows. Cognitive and professional effects of AI integration are also discussed, including automation bias, algorithmic aversion, deskilling, workload management, and burnout, with specific vulnerabilities for trainees. Furthermore, key elements of responsible implementation are summarized, such as liability and oversight implications, continuous monitoring for performance drift, usable explanations, basic AI literacy, and co-design with radiology teams. Finally, emerging systems are introduced, including vision-language models and adaptive learning loops. This review aims to provide a clear and accessible overview to help the radiology community recognize where human-AI collaboration can add value, where it can cause harm, and which questions future studies must address.
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.