Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) needs to be accepted and understood by physicians and medical students, but few have systematically assessed their attitudes. We investigated clinical AI acceptance among physicians and medical students around the world to provide implementation guidance.Materials and methods: We conducted a two-stage study, involving a foundational systematic review of physician and medical student acceptance of clinical AI. This enabled us to design a suitable web-based questionnaire which was then distributed among practitioners and trainees around the world.Results: Sixty studies were included in this systematic review, and 758 respondents from 39 countries completed the online questionnaire. Five (62.50%) of eight studies reported 65% or higher awareness regarding the application of clinical AI. Although, only 10–30% had actually used AI and 26 (74.28%) of 35 studies suggested there was a lack of AI knowledge. Our questionnaire uncovered 38% awareness rate and 20% utility rate of clinical AI, although 53% lacked basic knowledge of clinical AI. Forty-five studies mentioned attitudes toward clinical AI, and over 60% from 38 (84.44%) studies were positive about AI, although they were also concerned about the potential for unpredictable, incorrect results. Seventy-seven percent were optimistic about the prospect of clinical AI. The support rate for the statement that AI could replace physicians ranged from 6 to 78% across 40 studies which mentioned this topic. Five studies recommended that efforts should be made to increase collaboration. Our questionnaire showed 68% disagreed that AI would become a surrogate physician, but believed it should assist in clinical decision-making. Participants with different identities, experience and from different countries hold similar but subtly different attitudes.Conclusion: Most physicians and medical students appear aware of the increasing application of clinical AI, but lack practical experience and related knowledge. Overall, participants have positive but reserved attitudes about AI. In spite of the mixed opinions around clinical AI becoming a surrogate physician, there was a consensus that collaborations between the two should be strengthened. Further education should be conducted to alleviate anxieties associated with change and adopting new technologies.

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) called for global action towards the elimination of cervical cancer. One of the main strategies is to screen 70% of women at the age between 35 and 45 years and 90% of women managed appropriately by 2030. So far, approximately 85% of cervical cancers occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The colposcopy-guided biopsy is crucial for detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and becomes the main bottleneck limiting screening performance. Unprecedented advances in artificial intelligence (AI) enable the synergy of deep learning and digital colposcopy, which offers opportunities for automatic image-based diagnosis. To this end, we discuss the main challenges of traditional colposcopy and the solutions applying AI-guided digital colposcopy as an auxiliary diagnostic tool in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs).Main body: Existing challenges for the application of colposcopy in LMICs include strong dependence on the subjective experience of operators, substantial inter- and intra-operator variabilities, shortage of experienced colposcopists, consummate colposcopy training courses, and uniform diagnostic standard and strict quality control that are hard to be followed by colposcopists with limited diagnostic ability, resulting in discrepant reporting and documentation of colposcopy impressions. Organized colposcopy training courses should be viewed as an effective way to enhance the diagnostic ability of colposcopists, but implementing these courses in practice may not always be feasible to improve the overall diagnostic performance in a short period of time. Fortunately, AI has the potential to address colposcopic bottleneck, which could assist colposcopists in colposcopy imaging judgment, detection of underlying CINs, and guidance of biopsy sites. The automated workflow of colposcopy examination could create a novel cervical cancer screening model, reduce potentially false negatives and false positives, and improve the accuracy of colposcopy diagnosis and cervical biopsy.Conclusion: We believe that a practical and accurate AI-guided digital colposcopy has the potential to strengthen the diagnostic ability in guiding cervical biopsy, thereby improves cervical cancer screening performance in LMICs and accelerates the process of global cervical cancer elimination eventually.

Accurate early detection of breast and cervical cancer is vital for treatment success. Here, we conduct a meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic performance of deep learning (DL) algorithms for early breast and cervical cancer identification. Four subgroups are also investigated: cancer type (breast or cervical), validation type (internal or external), imaging modalities (mammography, ultrasound, cytology, or colposcopy), and DL algorithms versus clinicians. Thirty-five studies are deemed eligible for systematic review, 20 of which are meta-analyzed, with a pooled sensitivity of 88% (95% CI 85–90%), specificity of 84% (79–87%), and AUC of 0.92 (0.90–0.94). Acceptable diagnostic performance with analogous DL algorithms was highlighted across all subgroups. Therefore, DL algorithms could be useful for detecting breast and cervical cancer using medical imaging, having equivalent performance to human clinicians. However, this tentative assertion is based on studies with relatively poor designs and reporting, which likely caused bias and overestimated algorithm performance. Evidence-based, standardized guidelines around study methods and reporting are required to improve the quality of DL research.

Cervical cancer causes the fourth most cancerrelated deaths of women worldwide. Early detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) can significantly increase the survival rate of patients. In this paper, we propose a deep learning framework for the accurate identification of LSIL+ (including CIN and cervical cancer) using time-lapsed colposcopic images. The proposed framework involves two main components, i.e., key-frame feature encoding networks and feature fusion network. The features of the original (pre-acetic-acid) image and the colposcopic images captured at around 60s, 90s, 120s and 150s during the acetic acid test are encoded by the feature encoding networks. Several fusion approaches are compared, all of which outperform the existing automated cervical cancer diagnosis systems using a single time slot. A graph convolutional network with edge features (E-GCN) is found to be the most suitable fusion approach in our study, due to its excellent explainability consistent with the clinical practice. A large-scale dataset, containing time-lapsed colposcopic images from 7,668 patients, is collected from the collaborative hospital to train and validate our deep learning framework. Colposcopists are invited to compete with our computer-aided diagnosis system. The proposed deep learning framework achieves a classification accuracy of 78.33%—comparable to that of an in-service colposcopist— which demonstrates its potential to provide assistance in the realistic clinical scenario.

Clinicians face increasing workloads in medical imaging interpretation, and artificial intelligence (AI) offers potential relief. This meta-analysis evaluates the impact of human-AI collaboration on image interpretation workload. Four databases were searched for studies comparing reading time or quantity for image-based disease detection before and after AI integration. The Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy was modified to assess risk of bias. Workload reduction and relative diagnostic performance were pooled using random-effects model. Thirty-six studies were included. AI concurrent assistance reduced reading time by 27.20% (95% confidence interval, 18.22%–36.18%). The reading quantity decreased by 44.47% (40.68%–48.26%) and 61.72% (47.92%–75.52%) when AI served as the second reader and pre-screening, respectively. Overall relative sensitivity and specificity are 1.12 (1.09, 1.14) and 1.00 (1.00, 1.01), respectively. Despite these promising results, caution is warranted due to significant heterogeneity and uneven study quality.

Background: Colposcopy diagnosis and directed biopsy are the key components in cervical cancer screening programs. However, their performance is limited by the requirement for experienced colposcopists. This study aimed to develop and validate a Colposcopic Artificial Intelligence Auxiliary Diagnostic System (CAIADS) for grading colposcopic impressions and guiding biopsies.Methods: Anonymized digital records of 19,435 patients were obtained from six hospitals across China. These records included colposcopic images, clinical information, and pathological results (gold standard). The data were randomly assigned (7:1:2) to a training and a tuning set for developing CAIADS and to a validation set for evaluating performance.Results: The agreement between CAIADS-graded colposcopic impressions and pathology findings was higher than that of colposcopies interpreted by colposcopists (82.2% versus 65.9%, kappa 0.750 versus 0.516,p < 0.001). For detecting pathological high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse (HSIL+), CAIADS showed higher sensitivity than the use of colposcopies interpreted by colposcopists at either biopsy threshold (low-grade or worse 90.5%, 95% CI 88.9–91.4% versus 83.5%, 81.5–85.3%; high-grade or worse 71.9%, 69.5–74.2% versus 60.4%, 57.9–62.9%; allp < 0.001), whereas the specificities were similar (low-grade or worse 51.8%, 49.8–53.8% versus 52.0%, 50.0–54.1%; high-grade or worse 93.9%, 92.9–94.9% versus 94.9%, 93.9–95.7%; allp > 0.05). The CAIADS also demonstrated a superior ability in predicting biopsy sites, with a median mean-intersection-over-union (mIoU) of 0.758.Conclusions: The CAIADS has potential in assisting beginners and for improving the diagnostic quality of colposcopy and biopsy in the detection of cervical precancer/cancer.