United States newspaper and online media coverage of artificial intelligence and radiology from 1998 to 2023

To evaluate the frequency and content of media coverage pertaining to artificial intelligence (AI) and radiology in the United States from 1998 to 2023. The ProQuest US Newsstream database was queried for print and online articles mentioning AI and radiology published between January 1, 1998, and Ma...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical imaging 2024-09, Vol.113, p.110238, Article 110238
Main Authors: Zippi, Zachary D., Cortopassi, Isabel O., Grage, Rolf A., Johnson, Elizabeth M., McCann, Matthew R., Mergo, Patricia J., Sonavane, Sushilkumar K., Stowell, Justin T., White, Richard D., Little, Brent P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Artificial intelligence
Media coverage
Radiologist
Radiology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate the frequency and content of media coverage pertaining to artificial intelligence (AI) and radiology in the United States from 1998 to 2023. The ProQuest US Newsstream database was queried for print and online articles mentioning AI and radiology published between January 1, 1998, and March 30, 2023. A Boolean search using terms related to radiology and AI was used to retrieve full text and publication information. One of 9 readers with radiology expertise independently reviewed randomly assigned articles using a standardized scoring system. 379 articles met inclusion criteria, of which 290 were unique and 89 were syndicated articles. Most had a positive sentiment (74 %) towards AI, while negative sentiment was far less common (9 %). Frequency of positive sentiment was highest in articles with a focus on AI and radiology (86 %) and lowest in articles focusing on AI and non-medical topics (55 %). The net impact of AI on radiology was most commonly presented as positive (60 %). Benefits of AI were more frequently mentioned (76 %) than potential harms (46 %). Radiologists were interviewed or quoted in less than one-third of all articles. Portrayal of the impact of AI on radiology in US media coverage was mostly positive, and advantages of AI were more frequently discussed than potential risks. However, articles with a general non-medical focus were more likely to have a negative sentiment regarding the impact of AI on radiology than articles with a more specific focus on medicine and radiology. Radiologists were infrequently interviewed or quoted in media coverage. •Portrayal of the impact of AI on radiology in US media coverage was mostly positive.•Articles with a general non-medical focus were more likely to have a negative sentiment regarding the impact of AI on radiology.•Radiologists were infrequently interviewed or quoted in media coverage.
ISSN:0899-7071
1873-4499
1873-4499
DOI:10.1016/j.clinimag.2024.110238