在挪威乳房筛查中实施人工智能的经济情景分析——对放射科医生年、成本和效果的影响。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tron Anders Moger, Sahand Barati Nardin, Åsne Sørlien Holen, Nataliia Moshina, Solveig Hofvind
{"title":"在挪威乳房筛查中实施人工智能的经济情景分析——对放射科医生年、成本和效果的影响。","authors":"Tron Anders Moger, Sahand Barati Nardin, Åsne Sørlien Holen, Nataliia Moshina, Solveig Hofvind","doi":"10.1177/09691413251372829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo study the implications of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) as a decision support tool in the Norwegian breast cancer screening program concerning cost-effectiveness and time savings for radiologists.MethodsIn a decision tree model using recent data from AI vendors and the Cancer Registry of Norway, and assuming equal effectiveness of radiologists plus AI compared to standard practice, we simulated costs, effects and radiologist person-years over the next 20 years under different scenarios: 1) Assuming a €1 additional running cost of AI instead of the €3 assumed in the base case, 2) varying the AI-score thresholds for single vs. double readings, 3) varying the consensus and recall rates, and 4) reductions in the interval cancer rate compared to standard practice.ResultsAI was unlikely to be cost-effective, even when only one radiologist was used alongside AI for all screening exams. This also applied when assuming a 10% reduction in the consensus and recall rates. However, there was a 30-50% reduction in the radiologists' screen-reading volume. Assuming an additional running cost of €1 for AI, the costs were comparable, with similar probabilities of cost-effectiveness for AI and standard practice. Assuming a 5% reduction in the interval cancer rate, AI proved to be cost-effective across all willingness-to-pay values.ConclusionsAI may be cost-effective if the interval cancer rate is reduced by 5% or more, or if its additional cost is €1 per screening exam. Despite a substantial reduction in screening volume, this remains modest relative to the total radiologist person-years available within breast centers, accounting for only 3-4% of person-years.</p>","PeriodicalId":51089,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Screening","volume":" ","pages":"9691413251372829"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An economic scenario analysis of implementing artificial intelligence in BreastScreen Norway-Impact on radiologist person-years, costs and effects.\",\"authors\":\"Tron Anders Moger, Sahand Barati Nardin, Åsne Sørlien Holen, Nataliia Moshina, Solveig Hofvind\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09691413251372829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectiveTo study the implications of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) as a decision support tool in the Norwegian breast cancer screening program concerning cost-effectiveness and time savings for radiologists.MethodsIn a decision tree model using recent data from AI vendors and the Cancer Registry of Norway, and assuming equal effectiveness of radiologists plus AI compared to standard practice, we simulated costs, effects and radiologist person-years over the next 20 years under different scenarios: 1) Assuming a €1 additional running cost of AI instead of the €3 assumed in the base case, 2) varying the AI-score thresholds for single vs. double readings, 3) varying the consensus and recall rates, and 4) reductions in the interval cancer rate compared to standard practice.ResultsAI was unlikely to be cost-effective, even when only one radiologist was used alongside AI for all screening exams. This also applied when assuming a 10% reduction in the consensus and recall rates. However, there was a 30-50% reduction in the radiologists' screen-reading volume. Assuming an additional running cost of €1 for AI, the costs were comparable, with similar probabilities of cost-effectiveness for AI and standard practice. Assuming a 5% reduction in the interval cancer rate, AI proved to be cost-effective across all willingness-to-pay values.ConclusionsAI may be cost-effective if the interval cancer rate is reduced by 5% or more, or if its additional cost is €1 per screening exam. Despite a substantial reduction in screening volume, this remains modest relative to the total radiologist person-years available within breast centers, accounting for only 3-4% of person-years.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Screening\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"9691413251372829\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Screening\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413251372829\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Screening","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413251372829","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的研究在挪威乳腺癌筛查项目中实施人工智能(AI)作为决策支持工具对放射科医生节省成本效益和时间的影响。方法利用人工智能供应商和挪威癌症登记处的最新数据建立决策树模型,并假设与标准实践相比,放射科医生加人工智能的有效性相同,我们模拟了未来20年不同情景下的成本、效果和放射科医生人年:1)假设人工智能的额外运行成本为1欧元,而不是基本情况中假设的3欧元,2)改变单次和双次读数的人工智能得分阈值,3)改变共识和召回率,以及4)与标准实践相比,间隔癌症率降低。结果即使只有一名放射科医生与人工智能一起进行所有筛查检查,人工智能也不太可能具有成本效益。这也适用于假设共识率和召回率降低10%的情况。然而,放射科医生的屏幕阅读量减少了30-50%。假设人工智能的额外运行成本为1欧元,成本是可比较的,人工智能和标准实践的成本效益概率相似。假设间隔期癌症发病率降低5%,人工智能证明在所有支付意愿值中都是具有成本效益的。结论如果间隔期癌率降低5%或更多,或者每次筛查的额外费用为1欧元,则sai可能具有成本效益。尽管筛查量大幅减少,但相对于乳腺中心可获得的总放射科医生年人数而言,这仍然是适度的,仅占年人数的3-4%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An economic scenario analysis of implementing artificial intelligence in BreastScreen Norway-Impact on radiologist person-years, costs and effects.

ObjectiveTo study the implications of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) as a decision support tool in the Norwegian breast cancer screening program concerning cost-effectiveness and time savings for radiologists.MethodsIn a decision tree model using recent data from AI vendors and the Cancer Registry of Norway, and assuming equal effectiveness of radiologists plus AI compared to standard practice, we simulated costs, effects and radiologist person-years over the next 20 years under different scenarios: 1) Assuming a €1 additional running cost of AI instead of the €3 assumed in the base case, 2) varying the AI-score thresholds for single vs. double readings, 3) varying the consensus and recall rates, and 4) reductions in the interval cancer rate compared to standard practice.ResultsAI was unlikely to be cost-effective, even when only one radiologist was used alongside AI for all screening exams. This also applied when assuming a 10% reduction in the consensus and recall rates. However, there was a 30-50% reduction in the radiologists' screen-reading volume. Assuming an additional running cost of €1 for AI, the costs were comparable, with similar probabilities of cost-effectiveness for AI and standard practice. Assuming a 5% reduction in the interval cancer rate, AI proved to be cost-effective across all willingness-to-pay values.ConclusionsAI may be cost-effective if the interval cancer rate is reduced by 5% or more, or if its additional cost is €1 per screening exam. Despite a substantial reduction in screening volume, this remains modest relative to the total radiologist person-years available within breast centers, accounting for only 3-4% of person-years.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Screening
Journal of Medical Screening 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
40
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Screening, a fully peer reviewed journal, is concerned with all aspects of medical screening, particularly the publication of research that advances screening theory and practice. The journal aims to increase awareness of the principles of screening (quantitative and statistical aspects), screening techniques and procedures and methodologies from all specialties. An essential subscription for physicians, clinicians and academics with an interest in screening, epidemiology and public health.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信