Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41740116›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

Anticipating Moral and Economic Considerations, Opportunities, and Potential Frictions for AI in Medical Imaging: Multistakeholder Cocreation Study.

Martin Bastiaan Schilder, Alexandra Keyser, Susan van Hees, Alessandro Sbrizzi, Wouter Pieter Christiaan Boon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Martin Bastiaan SchilderComputational Imaging Group for MR Therapy and Diagnostics, Center for Image Sciences, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Utrecht, 3508GA, The Netherlands, 31 887569270.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-4058-4928
Alexandra KeyserFaculty of Geosciences, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-3124-5521
Susan van HeesFaculty of Geosciences, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8057-2356
Alessandro SbrizziComputational Imaging Group for MR Therapy and Diagnostics, Center for Image Sciences, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, Utrecht, 3508GA, The Netherlands, 31 887569270.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3276-4542
Wouter Pieter Christiaan BoonFaculty of Geosciences, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1218-193X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) promises to significantly impact daily radiology practices. Numerous studies have already been conducted that anticipate this potentially disruptive innovation. So far, these studies have mainly focused on single topics, such as "trust," or investigating perspectives of single stakeholder groups, such as "radiologists." Objective: This study aims to explore future directions for AI in radiology by incorporating perspectives of a heterogeneous group of stakeholders on a broad spectrum of moral and economic topics. It also aims to cocreate and reflect with a broad range of stakeholders on viable implementation scenarios for scalable AI applications in radiology in the Netherlands, thereby identifying potential opportunities and frictions, with a focus on moral and economic considerations. Methods: To inform the workshop design, a nonsystematic narrative literature search was performed to deepen our understanding of key moral and economic considerations at play in the field of radiology and AI. Workshop participants, representing a wide range of actors including radiologists, innovators, and patient representatives, were selected using purposive sampling. Data were collected in a cocreation workshop. In 3 subsequent rounds, mixed over 3 breakout groups, a total of 17 participants were asked to (1) map what they considered important moral and economic considerations, (2) envision possible future scenarios for AI in radiology, and (3) discuss opportunities, frictions, and routes to success. Transcribed recordings were coded and cross-checked. Results: Workshop participants envision future AI-driven scenarios, ranging from extramural imaging departments for increased accessibility to health care, to multimodal data integration for human-centered AI-enhanced diagnostics. Seven themes emerge from the discussions during the workshop: (1) trust and efficiency of AI technologies, (2) responsibilities in clinical decision-making when AI is involved, (3) diagnosis as a one-off versus an iterative process, (4) regulations as a requirement or a restriction, (5) economic benefits or drawbacks, (6) trade-off between amount of information required and patient privacy, and (7) environmental considerations. Conclusions: Reflecting on the 7 emerging themes, we identify three overarching topics: (1) human-AI collaboration and trust, (2) governance, regulation, and ethical safeguards, and (3) value creation and sustainability. These topics highlight the need to balance technological advancements with ethical responsibility, institutional accountability, and societal benefit. They also underscore the importance of designing AI systems that not only perform well but are also trusted and aligned with clinical workflows and patient values. These overarching themes offer a lens through which future research and policy can navigate the complex interplay between innovation, regulation, and real-world implementation. Future research is needed to validate the generalizability of the results across various countries and health care settings.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencecocreationradiologyresponsible research and innovationstakeholder perspectives

Identifiers

PMID41740116
PMCPMC12935424

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.