- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: AI Radiology software outperforming Radiologists?
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:00 pm to DesScorp
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:00 pm to DesScorp
I have 2 radiologists in my family and both use AI when they are reading. They said that AI is really good at catching a lot of stuff, but it misses a bunch of stuff too. They also said that it hits false positives for stuff all the time and they have to override it. They like the fact that it flags stuff for additional review so it’s basically like a second set of eyes looking at stuff.
Plus you will always have radiologists. Who is going to get sued - the AI? When they have to testify at a deposition or trail it isn’t like you can just have AI show up.
Plus you will always have radiologists. Who is going to get sued - the AI? When they have to testify at a deposition or trail it isn’t like you can just have AI show up.
3
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:02 pm to TulsaSooner78
quote:
So you don't think they will ever improve?
Like I said, the tools we use are getting worse. It's common knowledge.
I think the creators will figure out how to make them better, but right now I don't see it.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:25 pm to Odysseus32
AI is good for screening and seeing something “abnormal”
It sucks at deciding if that “abnormal” thing is actually significant
It sucks at deciding if that “abnormal” thing is actually significant
This post was edited on 9/25/25 at 8:31 pm
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:26 pm to T1gerNate
30 year old female assistant radiologists make over $300K per year
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:26 pm to T1gerNate
quote:
Radiologists don’t make $520K
Higher
Posted on 9/25/25 at 6:46 pm to DesScorp
They have technology to scan blood cells for manual differentials. It is good, but it's advantage is it can scan a much larger area in a much lower amount of time than an individual can using a microscope. Sometimes it is picking up junk, lots of time it is picking up junk, but it is a great tool to flag for someone to review. No way should it be allowed to replace scientists and pathologist in the roles they perform, but it is a great tool to use with human sign off. They have similar technology for urines, it is no where as near as good as classifying as the blood cell technology.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 7:19 pm to DesScorp
The AI stuff for radiology is fairly limited in scope at this time. Your post makes it sounds like AI can read any and all imaging.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:02 pm to GeauxTigers123
quote:
The AI stuff for radiology is fairly limited in scope at this time. Your post makes it sounds like AI can read any and all imaging.
"At this time"
The timeline can be debated but there is no question where this is headed. And much quicker than you might imagine.
AI will outperform human Radiologists in every way on every modality. It will teach itself without any human involvement whatsoever.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:04 pm to Cosmo
quote:
Busy private practice probably average 600-700 at least
If they make this much money, why wouldn’t everyone do it? You go to trade school for a year and make $700,000 per year?
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:07 pm to Spankum
quote:
You go to trade school for a year and make $700,000 per year?
What? A Radiologist is a physician. Are you thinking of a Radiology Tech?
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:10 pm to T1gerNate
quote:
Radiologists don’t make $520K
Maybe get out more baw
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:14 pm to Spankum
quote:
If they make this much money, why wouldn’t everyone do it? You go to trade school for a year and make $700,000 per year?
The conviction with which stupid people speak about things they have no clue about never ceases to amaze me.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:15 pm to MrSpock
quote:
A Radiologist is a physician. Are you thinking of a Radiology Tech?
Ahhhhh…that makes more sense to me. I also think this is where the misunderstanding lies in this thread. I
I was about to come out of retirement and sign up for trade school!
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:30 pm to Spankum
Radiologist is usually
4 years college
4 years med school
5 years residency
And usually 1 year fellowship.
You can become a Rad tech at community college but it’s usually at least 2 years (or more if BS program or MRI tech).
4 years college
4 years med school
5 years residency
And usually 1 year fellowship.
You can become a Rad tech at community college but it’s usually at least 2 years (or more if BS program or MRI tech).
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:30 pm to tiger rag 93
quote:
conviction with which stupid people speak about things they have no clue about never ceases to amaze me.
It’s incredible.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:31 pm to Tiger985
quote:
"At this time" The timeline can be debated but there is no question where this is headed. And much quicker than you might imagine. AI will outperform human Radiologists in every way on every modality. It will teach itself without any human involvement whatsoever.
Well the quote from the OP was from 2016 and that guy was flat out wrong. Most radiologists are working extra at night when they get home just to try to keep their group’s worklist caught up.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:33 pm to Tiger985
quote:
AI will outperform human Radiologists in every way on every modality. It will teach itself without any human involvement whatsoever.
The future will certainly be interesting. And are we talking about identifying a finding(s) or interpretation. Those are two wildly different tasks. I'm also sure there's going to be lot of ethical considerations and liability concerns with the AI overlords making the final interpretation.
But as it's stands today the AI suite we have is so so at best.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:39 pm to Tiger985
quote:
AI will outperform human Radiologists in every way on every modality. It will teach itself without any human involvement whatsoever.
After the past few years of people using AI it has been pretty obvious that isn't true.
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:49 pm to GetMeOutOfHere
quote:
After the past few years of people using AI it has been pretty obvious that isn't true.
This is always my biggest gripe with any AI in medicine. Whose to say the frick stick training the initial models was correct. Depending on the study you sometimes can't even get consensus within the same department let alone different groups.
This post was edited on 9/25/25 at 8:50 pm
Posted on 9/25/25 at 8:51 pm to Domo Arigato
Yeah, IBM Watson doing this was a big thing we touted in 2016-2017ish. Leave it to IBM to frick up "AI" before it was called "AI."
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News