Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: Summary of the Joint European and North American Multisociety Statement.

Journal: Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR
PMID:

Abstract

This is a condensed summary of an international multisociety statement on ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiology produced by the ACR, European Society of Radiology, RSNA, Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine, European Society of Medical Imaging Informatics, Canadian Association of Radiologists, and American Association of Physicists in Medicine. AI has great potential to increase efficiency and accuracy throughout radiology, but it also carries inherent pitfalls and biases. Widespread use of AI-based intelligent and autonomous systems in radiology can increase the risk of systemic errors with high consequence and highlights complex ethical and societal issues. Currently, there is little experience using AI for patient care in diverse clinical settings. Extensive research is needed to understand how to best deploy AI in clinical practice. This statement highlights our consensus that ethical use of AI in radiology should promote well-being, minimize harm, and ensure that the benefits and harms are distributed among stakeholders in a just manner. We believe AI should respect human rights and freedoms, including dignity and privacy. It should be designed for maximum transparency and dependability. Ultimate responsibility and accountability for AI remains with its human designers and operators for the foreseeable future. The radiology community should start now to develop codes of ethics and practice for AI that promote any use that helps patients and the common good and should block use of radiology data and algorithms for financial gain without those two attributes.

Authors

  • J Raymond Geis
    4 Department of Radiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Fort Collins, CO.
  • Adrian P Brady
    Mercy University Hospital, Cork, Ireland.
  • Carol C Wu
    University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
  • Jack Spencer
    MIT, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
  • Erik Ranschaert
    Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Jacob L Jaremko
    Department of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
  • Steve G Langer
    Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. langer.steve@mayo.edu.
  • Andrea Borondy Kitts
    Lahey Hospital & Medical Center, Burlington, Massachusetts.
  • Judy Birch
    Pelvic Pain Support Network, Poole, UK.
  • William F Shields
    General Counsel, American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia.
  • Robert van den Hoven van Genderen
    Center of Law and Internet, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Elmar Kotter
    Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, Freiburg, Germany.
  • Judy Wawira Gichoya
    Department of Interventional Radiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Tessa S Cook
    Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 (J.M.S., T.P., J.A., C.E.K., T.S.C.); and Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Mass (J.M.S.).
  • Matthew B Morgan
    University of Utah School of Medicine, Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
  • An Tang
    Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montreal, Canada.
  • Nabile M Safdar
    Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: nmsafda@emory.edu.
  • Marc Kohli
    1 Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California, San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave, M-391, San Francisco, CA 94143.