This paper explores medical imaging's epistemology, focusing on image reading challenges. It adopts "reliabilism," defining knowledge as reliably error-minimized outcomes. While AI lacks maturity, specialized physicians remain vital for image reading. Errors, up to 30%, persist in radiological reports. "Seeing-as," akin to Gestalt perception, further complicates, blurring error distinctions. Transparency and accountability challenges arise due to its complexity. The paper suggests avenues to reconcile knowledge accountability and the intricate "seeing-as" process, aiming to deepen the understanding of imaging's epistemology amidst these challenges.
Errors in imaging reading and reporting / Fanti, Stefano; Lalumera, Elisabetta. - In: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING. - ISSN 1619-7070. - ELETTRONICO. - 50:6(2023), pp. 1546-1548. [10.1007/s00259-023-06131-5]
Errors in imaging reading and reporting
Fanti, Stefano
Co-primo
Writing – Review & Editing
;Lalumera, ElisabettaCo-primo
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
2023
Abstract
This paper explores medical imaging's epistemology, focusing on image reading challenges. It adopts "reliabilism," defining knowledge as reliably error-minimized outcomes. While AI lacks maturity, specialized physicians remain vital for image reading. Errors, up to 30%, persist in radiological reports. "Seeing-as," akin to Gestalt perception, further complicates, blurring error distinctions. Transparency and accountability challenges arise due to its complexity. The paper suggests avenues to reconcile knowledge accountability and the intricate "seeing-as" process, aiming to deepen the understanding of imaging's epistemology amidst these challenges.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
