4.7 Article

To buy or not to buy-evaluating commercial AI solutions in radiology (the ECLAIR guidelines)

期刊

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
卷 31, 期 6, 页码 3786-3796

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-020-07684-x

关键词

Artificial intelligence; Software; Legislation; Workload; Equipment and supplies

资金

  1. Universite de Lausanne

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, artificial intelligence has made significant progress in medical imaging, leading to the availability of numerous commercial AI solutions that require careful assessment before purchase. The ECLAIR guidelines proposed by authors from academia and industry offer a practical framework to help stakeholders evaluate commercial AI solutions in radiology, addressing factors such as relevance, performance, validation, usability, integration, regulatory aspects, and financial considerations.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has made impressive progress over the past few years, including many applications in medical imaging. Numerous commercial solutions based on AI techniques are now available for sale, forcing radiology practices to learn how to properly assess these tools. While several guidelines describing good practices for conducting and reporting AI-based research in medicine and radiology have been published, fewer efforts have focused on recommendations addressing the key questions to consider when critically assessing AI solutions before purchase. Commercial AI solutions are typically complicated software products, for the evaluation of which many factors are to be considered. In this work, authors from academia and industry have joined efforts to propose a practical framework that will help stakeholders evaluate commercial AI solutions in radiology (the ECLAIR guidelines) and reach an informed decision. Topics to consider in the evaluation include the relevance of the solution from the point of view of each stakeholder, issues regarding performance and validation, usability and integration, regulatory and legal aspects, and financial and support services.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据