More Little AI Malpractice Clues

Or, at least what 282 people on the internet thought.

There’s very little to see in this article about the influence of AI use on radiology liability – in fact, there’s just this:

It’s just a brief communication of a scenario provided to participants on an internet survey platform: if an AI identifies a hemorrhagic stroke, yet the radiologist persists in denying its existence, has the radiologist met their duty-of-care to the patient?

Interestingly, this survey found differing opinions depending on where AI was injected into the scenario. A “single read” scenario involved the AI finding being displayed to the radiologist prior to their initial read – and the jury of the public was quite unsympathetic. However, in a “double read” scenario, the radiologist viewed the study, then received the AI findings, and viewed the read again. In this second instance, they judged the radiologist more leniently.

This is just a small study and quite superficial in its question, but it’s another clue as to how the medicolegal environment might treat clinicians involved in AI recommendations.