Human and Artificial Intelligence in Radiology

Current Status, Evidence, Regulation, and Future Perspectives

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59667/sjoranm.v27i1.14

Keywords:

artificial intelligence, transparency, radiology

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly evolved into a transformative force in radiology, complementing human intelligence across the entire imaging workflow. Current applications range from image acquisition and reconstruction to automated detection, quantification, triage, and clinical decision support. Evidence to date demonstrates that AI systems can match or exceed human performance in narrowly defined tasks, particularly in pattern recognition and workflow optimization. However, robust prospective validation, demonstration of clinical impact, and proof of generalizability across institutions and populations remain limited.

Human intelligence continues to play a central role in contextual interpretation, integration of clinical information, ethical judgment, and responsibility for patient care. Rather than replacing radiologists, AI is increasingly viewed as an augmentative tool that enhances diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and consistency when appropriately implemented.

Regulatory frameworks are evolving in response to these developments. In Europe, the Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and the forthcoming AI Act introduce stricter requirements for transparency, risk classification, post-market surveillance, and human oversight. Comparable regulatory efforts are underway globally, aiming to balance innovation with patient safety, data protection, and accountability. Nonetheless, regulatory heterogeneity and the dynamic nature of adaptive AI systems pose ongoing challenges.

Looking ahead, the future of radiology will be shaped by closer human–AI collaboration, increased emphasis on explainability, continuous learning systems under regulatory control, and higher-quality clinical evidence. Education and training of radiologists in AI literacy will be essential. Ultimately, the successful integration of artificial intelligence into radiology will depend not only on technological progress, but also on evidence-based implementation, clear regulation, and sustained human expertise.

Author Biographies

  • Zainab Magomedova, Department of Radiology of The City Clinical Hospital No. 1 named after NI Pirogov, Moscow, Russian Federation. - Department of Cardiology, Functional and Ultrasound Diagnostics, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation

    Senior Consultant of Radiology & Cardiology

     

  • Ekaterina S. Pershina, Department of Radiology of The City Clinical Hospital No. 1 named after NI Pirogov, Moscow, Russian Federation. - Department of Cardiology, Functional and Ultrasound Diagnostics, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Moscow, Russian Federation

    Senior Consultant of Radiology & Cardiology

  • Keivan Daneshvar, Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern

    Senior Consultant of Radiology

  • Gerd Noeldge, Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital Bern, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern

    Senior Consultant in Radiology

  • Frank Mosler, Department of Diagnostic, Interventional and Pediatric Radiology, Inselspital, University Hospital of Bern, University of Bern

    Senior Consultant in Radiology & Neuroradiology

References

1. Yu F, Moehring A, Banerjee O, et al. Heterogeneity and predictors of the effects of artificial intelligence assistance on radiologists. Nat Med. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-024-02850-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-024-02850-w

2. van Winkel SL, Peters J, Janssen N, et al. Artificial intelligence as an independent second reader for breast cancer screening: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Digit Health. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2025.100882 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landig.2025.100882

3. Barnett M, Wang D, Beadnall HN, et al. Real-world clinical validation of an artificial intelligence system for MRI monitoring in multiple sclerosis. npj Digit Med. 2023;6:197. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00940-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00940-6

4. Park SH, Han K, Jang HY, et al. Methods for clinical evaluation of artificial intelligence algorithms for medical diagnosis. Radiology. 2023;307(2):e220182. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.220182 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.220182

5. Vasey B, Nagendran M, Campbell B, et al; DECIDE-AI Expert Group. Reporting guideline for the early-stage clinical evaluation of decision support systems driven by artificial intelligence: DECIDE-AI. Nat Med. 2022;28(5):924–933. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01772-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01772-9

6. Elvidge J, Hawksworth C, Saygın Avşar T, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards for interventions that use artificial intelligence (CHEERS-AI). Value Health. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.006

7. Kotter E, Brady AP, McEnery T, et al; ESR AI Working Group. Guiding artificial intelligence in radiology: ESR recommendations for effective implementation of the European AI Act. Insights Imaging. 2025;16:19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-01905-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-01905-x

8. Hill DLG. Artificial intelligence in imaging: the regulatory landscape. Br J Radiol. 2024;97(11 57):20240002. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjr/tqae002

9. Park SH. Challenges and additional considerations for regulatory approval of large language models as medical devices. Radiology. 2024;312(1):e241703. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.241703 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.241703

10. Ketola JHJ, Inkinen SI, Mäkelä T, et al. Testing processes for artificial intelligence applications in radiology practice. Phys Med. 2024;118:104842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104842 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2024.104842

11. Huisman M, van Ginneken B, Harvey H. The emperor has few clothes: a realistic appraisal of current artificial intelligence in radiology. Eur Radiol. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10664-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-024-10664-0

12. Morales Santos Á, Lojo Lendoiro S, Rovira Cañellas M, Valdés Solís P. Legal regulation of artificial intelligence in the European Union: a practical guide for radiologists. Radiologia (Engl Ed). 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rxeng.2023.11.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rxeng.2023.11.011

13. Garni et al. The Regulatory Needs for Radiation Protection Devices based upon Artificial Intelligence: State task or leave unregulated?. (2024). Swiss Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, 5(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.59667/sjoranm.v5i1.11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.59667/sjoranm.v5i1.11

14. European Society of Radiology (ESR). Value-based radiology: what is the ESR doing, and what should we do in the future? Insights Imaging. 2021;12:108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01056-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-021-01056-9

15. Brady AP, Brink JA, Slavotinek J. Radiology in the Era of Value-Based Healthcare: A Multisociety Perspec-tive. Radiology. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020209027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2020209027

16. European Society of Radiology (ESR). The role of radiologist in the changing world of healthcare: a White Paper of the European Society of Radiology (ESR). Insights Imaging. 2022;13:100. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-022-01241-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-022-01241-4

17. Ho E. Role of radiology in a multidisciplinary approach to patient care: summary of the ESR International Forum 2022. Insights Imaging. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01377-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-023-01377-x

18. Rockall A, Visser JJ, Garcia-Villar C, et al; European Society of Radiology (ESR) Value-based Radiology Subcommittee. Feedback in radiology: Essential tool for improving user experience and providing value-based care. Insights Imaging. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-02002-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-02002-9

19. Fuchsjäger M, Brady AP, et al (ESR Value-Based Radiology Subcommittee). Patient survey of value in relation to radiology: results from a survey of the European Society of Radiology (ESR) value-based radiology subcommittee. Insights Imaging. 2021;12:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00943-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00943-x

20. Iftikhar S, Rahmani S, Zaree OA, et al. The Value of Radiology Consultation: Effort Allocation, Clinical Impact, and Untapped Opportunities. J Am Coll Radiol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.04.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2025.04.006

21. Gutzeit A, Sartoretti E, Reisinger C, et al. Direct communication between radiologists and patients improves the quality of imaging reports. Eur Radiol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07933-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-07933-7

22. Brady AP, Brink JA, Slavotinek J. Radiology and value-based healthcare. JAMA. 2020;324(13):1286-1287. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.14930 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.14930

23. European Society of Radiology (ESR). The identity and role of the radiologist in 2020: a survey among ESR full radiologist members. Insights Imaging. 2020;11:130. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00945-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-020-00945-9

24. World Health Organization; International Atomic Energy Agency; International Organization for Medical Physics; International Radiation Protection Association. Enhancing radiation safety culture in health care: guidance for health care providers. World Health Organization; 2024. Published July 10, 2024. Accessed January 17, 2026. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240091115

25. ICRP, 2007. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (2-4). https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20103

26. Smith-Bindman R, Wang Y, Chu P, et al. International variation in radiation dose for computed tomography examinations: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2019;364:k4931. Published 2019 Jan 2. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k4931 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k4931

27. Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Wang Y, et al. Comparison of the Effectiveness of Single-Component and Multicomponent Interventions for Reducing Radiation Doses in Patients Undergoing Computed Tomography: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(5):666-675. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.0064 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.0064

28. International Atomic Energy Agency, issuing body, et al. Radiation Protection and Safety in Medical Uses of Ionizing Radiation. International Atomic Energy Agency, 2018, https://www.iaea.org/publications/11102/radiation-protection-and-safety-in-medical-uses-of-ionizing-radiation.

29. European Society of Radiology (ESR). What the radiologist should know about artificial intelligence - an ESR white paper. Insights Imaging. 2019;10(1):44. Published 2019 Apr 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0738-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0738-2

30. Kelly CJ, Karthikesalingam A, Suleyman M, Corrado G, King D. Key challenges for delivering clinical impact with artificial intelligence. BMC Med. 2019 Oct 29;17(1):195. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1426-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1426-2

31. McKinney SM, Sieniek M, Godbole V, et al. International evaluation of an AI system for breast cancer screening. Nature. 2020;577(7788):89-94. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1799-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1799-6

32. Kiani A, Uyumazturk B, Rajpurkar P, et al. Impact of a deep learning assistant on the histopathologic classification of liver cancer. NPJ Digit Med. 2020;3:23. Published 2020 Feb 26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0232-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0232-8

33. Seah JCY, Tang CHM, Buchlak QD, et al. Effect of a comprehensive deep-learning model on the accuracy of chest x-ray interpretation by radiologists: a retrospective, multireader multicase study. Lancet Digit Health. 2021;3(8): e496-e506. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00106-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00106-0

34. Langlotz CP, Allen B, Erickson BJ, et al. A Roadmap for Foundational Research on Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging: From the 2018 NIH/RSNA/ACR/The Academy Workshop. Radio-logy. 2019;291(3):781-791. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190613 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019190613

35. van Dijk LV, Van den Bosch L, Aljabar P, et al. Improving automatic delineation for head and neck organs at risk by Deep Learning Contouring. Radiother Oncol. 2020;142:115-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2019.09.022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2019.09.022

36. Sharp G, Fritscher KD, Pekar V, et al. Vision 20/20: perspectives on automated image segmentation for radiotherapy. Med Phys. 2014; 41(5):050902. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4871620 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4871620

37. Liu X, Faes L, Kale AU, et al. A comparison of deep learning performance against health-care professionals in detecting diseases from medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Digit Health. 2019;1(6):e271-e297. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30123-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(19)30123-2

38. Ting DSW, Pasquale LR, Peng L, et al. Artificial intelligence and deep learning in ophthalmology. Br J Ophthalmol. 2019;103(2): 167-175. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-313173 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-313173

39. Singh V, Cheng S, Kwan AC, Ebinger J. United States Food and Drug Administration regulation of clinical software in the era of artificial intelligence and machine learning. Mayo Clin Proc Digit Health. 2025;3(3):100231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcpdig.2025.100231 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcpdig.2025.100231

40. Jeblick K, Schachtner B, Dexl J, et al. ChatGPT makes medicine easy to swallow: an exploratory case study on simplified radiology reports. Eur Radiol. 2024;34(5):2817-2825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10213-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-023-10213-1

41. Rao A, Kim J, Kamineni M, Pang M, Lie W, Succi MD. Evaluating ChatGPT as an Adjunct for Radiologic Decision-Making. Preprint. medRxiv. 2023;2023.02.02.23285399. Published 2023 Feb 7. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.02.23285399 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.02.02.23285399

42. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44-56. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7

Downloads

Published

2026-01-30

Issue

Vol. 27 No. 1 (2026)

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Zainab Magomedova, Ekaterina S. Pershina, Keivan Daneshvar, Gerd Noeldge, Frank Mosler

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This license requires that reusers give credit to the creator. It allows reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, even for commercial purposes.

How to Cite

Magomedova, Z., Pershina, E. S., Keivan, D., Nöldge, G., & Frank, M. (2026). Human and Artificial Intelligence in Radiology: Current Status, Evidence, Regulation, and Future Perspectives. Swiss Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, 27(1), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.59667/sjoranm.v27i1.14

Share

Similar Articles

1-10 of 50

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>