Cross-sectional survey reveals higher acceptance of AI-driven 3D interactive radiology reports in hospital physicians versus private practitioners, highlighting setting-specific adoption barriers.
Introduction A 3D interactive report is a state-of-the-art artificial intelligence (AI) tool that integrates a patient’s imaging history into an intuitive visualisation. Yet, despite the many potential benefits to patients, referring physicians, and the healthcare system, a substantial gap exists between such AI developments and their clinical implementation. The goal of this study was to evaluate physicians’ attitudes towards AI and their readiness to implement new AI-technologies in different practice settings.Materials and Methods A 15-question cross-sectional online survey addressing AI in Radiology was distributed to physicians through professional networks and at a national neuroscience conference. Results were summarized using descriptive statistics, as appropriate for the type and distribution of the data. Group comparisons were made using Chi-square or Fisher’s test, as appropriate.Results 75 physicians completed the survey between September-December 2025, 52 (69%) being hospital physicians and the rest private practitioners. Response rate was 17%. Hospital physicians were significantly more likely to implement a 3D interactive report in daily practice (Hospital: 82.4% vs. Private Practice: 36.8%; p < 0.001). Private practitioners more often believed that of AI-based radiology aids must be explicitly disclosed (82.6%), compared to hospital physicians (76.9%; p = 0.007).Conclusion Hospital physicians were more receptive for use of AI technologies in radiology compared to private practitioners. Practice patterns, economic factors, doctor-patient relationships, and frequency of interaction with the radiology department likely influence how AI use in radiology is perceived.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Weibel et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: