Public articles linked to the same research event.
Academic Radiology This article argues that radiology should treat sequence as a design variable in routine clinical practice: capture what the radiologist concluded before AI exposure, then what the AI displayed and how the radiologist responded, thereby preserving the pre-AI interpretation as an auditable event, while noting that responsibility remains with the radiologist who signs the report and that the proposal is bounded by what each device is cleared to do.
This article argues that radiology should treat sequence as a design variable in routine clinical practice: capture what the radiologist concluded before AI exposure, then what the AI displayed and how the radiologist responded, thereby preserving the pre-AI interpretation as an auditable event, while noting that responsibility remains with the radiologist who signs the report and that the proposal is bounded by what each device is cleared to do.
This article argues that radiology should treat sequence as a design variable in routine clinical practice: capture what the radiologist concluded before AI exposure, then what the AI displayed and how the radiologist responded, thereby preserving the pre-AI interpretation as an auditable event, while noting that responsibility remains with the radiologist who signs the report and that the proposal is bounded by what each device is cleared to do.
This article argues that radiology should treat sequence as a design variable in routine clinical practice: capture what the radiologist concluded before AI exposure, then what the AI displayed and how the radiologist responded, thereby preserving the pre-AI interpretation as an auditable event, while noting that responsibility remains with the radiologist who signs the report and that the proposal is bounded by what each device is cleared to do.