ArticleEuropean radiology2026
From dusk till dawn?-Night shift-induced fatigue, diagnostic performance, and AI assistance in chest radiography.
Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the impact of night shift-induced fatigue on radiology residents' diagnostic performance and to assess whether AI assistance offsets potential performance loss. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this prospective intra-individual reader study, ten radiology residents (mean experience: 35 months; three women) interpreted three sets of 33 chest radiographs before and after a first-call on-site night shift. Sessions included two pre-shift readings (morning/afternoon, without AI) and two post-shift readings (morning, with/without AI). Eye tracking captured fixation duration and saccade count, and fatigue was defined as a ≥ 5% reduction in the slope of the saccadic main sequence between pre- and post-shift sessions. Diagnostic accuracy (Cohen's κ vs. expert majority vote), efficiency (mean reporting time per radiograph), eye-tracking metrics, and user surveys were analyzed with generalized linear mixed models and post-hoc Tukey-adjusted pairwise comparisons.
resultsSix of ten radiology residents were classified as fatigued, among whom diagnostic accuracy declined significantly post-shift (from κ = 0.71 ± 0.05 to κ = 0.61 ± 0.10; p < 0.001), with reduced fixation duration (p = 0.010) and saccade count (p = 0.015). Non-fatigued readers showed a smaller decline in accuracy (from κ = 0.72 ± 0.03 to κ = 0.65 ± 0.03; p = 0.037). Reporting times remained stable pre- and post-shift (p ≥ 0.463). AI assistance did not significantly improve diagnostic accuracy (Δκ = 0.03-0.04; p ≥ 0.525). Reporting times were numerically shorter with AI assistance in fatigued readers (Δ6.3 s; p = 0.122) and significantly shorter in non-fatigued readers (Δ9.9 s; p = 0.031). Surveys indicated mental exhaustion and reduced focus in fatigued readers.
conclusionNight-shift-induced fatigue impaired diagnostic accuracy without slowing reporting speed, raising patient safety concerns. The utilized AI model did not restore pre-shift performance. KEY POINTS: Question Night-shift-induced fatigue may reduce diagnostic accuracy of radiology residents in chest radiography, yet its objective quantification and the compensatory potential of AI assistance remain unclear. Findings Fatigue, based on eye-tracking measurements of oculomotor efficiency, reduced diagnostic accuracy after night shifts without slowing reporting speed; AI assistance did not significantly improve accuracy. Clinical relevance Night-shift-induced fatigue can lower diagnostic accuracy in chest radiography despite unchanged reporting speed, posing patient-safety risks. The AI model used in this study cannot fully compensate for fatigue-related performance decline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42918884What 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.