Incidental findings in research brain MRI: Definition, prevalence and ethical implications.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Kenneth J de Jong, Emma Poon, Michelle Foo, Julian Maingard, Hong Kuan Kok, Christen Barras, Anousha Yazdabadi, Benham Shaygi, Gregory J Fitt, Gary Egan, Mark Brooks, Hamed Asadi
{"title":"Incidental findings in research brain MRI: Definition, prevalence and ethical implications.","authors":"Kenneth J de Jong, Emma Poon, Michelle Foo, Julian Maingard, Hong Kuan Kok, Christen Barras, Anousha Yazdabadi, Benham Shaygi, Gregory J Fitt, Gary Egan, Mark Brooks, Hamed Asadi","doi":"10.1111/1754-9485.13744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Radiological incidental findings (IFs) are previously undetected abnormalities which are unrelated to the original indication for imaging and are unexpectedly discovered. In brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the prevalence of IFs is increasing. By reviewing the literature on IFs in brain MRI performed for research purposes and discussing ethical considerations of IFs, this paper provides an overview of brain IF research results and factors contributing to inconsistencies and considers how the consent process can be improved from an ethical perspective. We found that despite extensive literature regarding IFs in research MRI of the brain, there are major inconsistencies in the reported prevalence, ranging from 1.3% to 99%. Many factors appear to contribute to this broad range: lack of standardised definition, participant demographics variance, heterogenous MRI scanner strength and sequences, reporter variation and results classification. We also found significant discrepancies in the review, consent and clinical communication processes pertaining to the ethical nature of these studies. These findings have implications for future studies, particularly those involving artificial intelligence. Further research, particularly in relation to MRI brain IFs would be useful to explore the generalisability of study results.</p>","PeriodicalId":16218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.13744","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Radiological incidental findings (IFs) are previously undetected abnormalities which are unrelated to the original indication for imaging and are unexpectedly discovered. In brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the prevalence of IFs is increasing. By reviewing the literature on IFs in brain MRI performed for research purposes and discussing ethical considerations of IFs, this paper provides an overview of brain IF research results and factors contributing to inconsistencies and considers how the consent process can be improved from an ethical perspective. We found that despite extensive literature regarding IFs in research MRI of the brain, there are major inconsistencies in the reported prevalence, ranging from 1.3% to 99%. Many factors appear to contribute to this broad range: lack of standardised definition, participant demographics variance, heterogenous MRI scanner strength and sequences, reporter variation and results classification. We also found significant discrepancies in the review, consent and clinical communication processes pertaining to the ethical nature of these studies. These findings have implications for future studies, particularly those involving artificial intelligence. Further research, particularly in relation to MRI brain IFs would be useful to explore the generalisability of study results.

脑磁共振成像研究中的意外发现:定义、发生率和伦理意义。
放射学意外发现(IFs)是指以前未发现的异常情况,这些异常情况与最初的成像适应症无关,而且是意外发现的。在脑磁共振成像(MRI)中,IFs 的发生率越来越高。通过回顾以研究为目的的脑磁共振成像中 IFs 的相关文献并讨论 IFs 的伦理因素,本文概述了脑 IF 的研究结果和导致不一致的因素,并从伦理角度探讨了如何改进同意程序。我们发现,尽管有大量文献涉及脑部核磁共振成像研究中的 IFs,但报告的发生率存在很大的不一致,从 1.3% 到 99% 不等。造成这一广泛范围的因素似乎有很多:缺乏标准化定义、参与者人口统计学差异、不同的 MRI 扫描仪强度和序列、报告者差异和结果分类。我们还发现,在与这些研究的伦理性质相关的审查、同意和临床沟通过程中存在重大差异。这些发现对未来的研究,尤其是涉及人工智能的研究具有启示意义。进一步的研究,尤其是与核磁共振成像脑中频有关的研究,将有助于探索研究结果的普遍性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
133
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology (formerly Australasian Radiology) is the official journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists, publishing articles of scientific excellence in radiology and radiation oncology. Manuscripts are judged on the basis of their contribution of original data and ideas or interpretation. All articles are peer reviewed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信