Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become commonplace to solve routine everyday tasks. Because of the exponential growth in medical imaging data volume and complexity, the workload on radiologists is steadily increasing. We project that the gap between the number of imaging exams and the number of expert radiologist readers required to cover this increase will continue to expand, consequently introducing a demand for AI-based tools that improve the efficiency with which radiologists can comfortably interpret these exams. AI has been shown to improve efficiency in medical-image generation, processing, and interpretation, and a variety of such AI models have been developed across research labs worldwide. However, very few of these, if any, find their way into routine clinical use, a discrepancy that reflects the divide between AI research and successful AI translation. To address the barrier to clinical deployment, we have formed MONAI Consortium, an open-source community which is building standards for AI deployment in healthcare institutions, and developing tools and infrastructure to facilitate their implementation. This report represents several years of weekly discussions and hands-on problem solving experience by groups of industry experts and clinicians in the MONAI Consortium. We identify barriers between AI-model development in research labs and subsequent clinical deployment and propose solutions. Our report provides guidance on processes which take an imaging AI model from development to clinical implementation in a healthcare institution. We discuss various AI integration points in a clinical Radiology workflow. We also present a taxonomy of Radiology AI use-cases. Through this report, we intend to educate the stakeholders in healthcare and AI (AI researchers, radiologists, imaging informaticists, and regulators) about cross-disciplinary challenges and possible solutions.

This study evaluates the effect of counterfactual explanations on the interpretation of chest X-rays. We conduct a reader study with two radiologists assessing 240 chest X-ray predictions to rate their confidence that the model's prediction is correct using a 5 point scale. Half of the predictions are false positives. Each prediction is explained twice, once using traditional attribution methods and once with a counterfactual explanation. The overall results indicate that counterfactual explanations allow a radiologist to have more confidence in true positive predictions compared to traditional approaches (0.15$\pm$0.95 with p=0.01) with only a small increase in false positive predictions (0.04$\pm$1.06 with p=0.57). We observe the specific prediction tasks of Mass and Atelectasis appear to benefit the most compared to other tasks.

Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA Labeling training datasets has become a key barrier to building medical machine learning models. One strategy is to generate training labels programmatically, for example by applying natural language processing pipelines to text reports associated with imaging studies. We propose cross-modal data programming, which generalizes this intuitive strategy in a theoretically-grounded way that enables simpler, clinician-driven input, reduces required labeling time, and improves with additional unlabeled data. In this approach, clinicians generate training labels for models defined over a target modality (e.g. The resulting technical challenge consists of estimating the accuracies and correlations of these rules; we extend a recent unsupervised generative modeling technique to handle this cross-modal setting in a provably consistent way. Across four applications in radiography, computed tomography, and electroencephalography, and using only several hours of clinician time, our approach matches or exceeds the efficacy of physician-months of hand-labeling with statistical significance, demonstrating a fundamentally faster and more flexible way of building machine learning models in medicine. In addition to being extremely costly, these training sets are inflexible: given a new classification schema, imaging system, patient population, or other change in the data distribution or modeling task, the training set generally needs to be relabeled from scratch. One manifestation of this shift in the broader machine learning community is the increasing use of weak supervision approaches, where training data is labeled in noisier, higher-level, often programmatic ways, rather than manually by experts. We broadly characterize these methods as cross-modal weak supervision approaches, in which the strategy is to programmatically extract labels from an auxiliary modality--e.g. the unstructured text reports accompanying an imaging study--which are then used as training labels for a model defined over the target modality, e.g. These methods follow the intuition that programmatically extracting labels from the auxiliary modality can be far faster and easier than hand-labeling or deriving labels from the target modality directly.