Because any radiologist directly involved in the work of automating it away could capture multiple salaries.
> but mostly dragging their feet and hindering real progress, presumably because of the threat it posed.
It sounds more like they were not offered a stake, or were not sufficiently convinced it would work enough to accept a stake.
Most radiologists aren’t paid by the hour so it’s not like the longer it takes to review and diagnose the better. Having automation tools would allow a radiologist to do even more work and make even more money.
Unless someone literally thinks they won’t need an authoritative radiologist in the loop any longer. But that’s pretty silly since we can’t even automate a McDonald’s cook out of the picture.
I'd love to understand your viewpoint here. What you're describing would be awesome to a small segment of radiologists, but then what happens to the rest of them?
Further, why would the rest agree to it?!?! This isnt web ad sales or hosting where anyone can come in, do a better job, and win market share and get rich. Rather, here, the limited set of Radiologists would need to agree on standards of practice via the ABR -- why would they do that if it means most of them suffer as a result?
The same thing, they would do more radiology consults.
This is just like any other tech that’s improved radiology, it’s reduced the cost so there are more consults done.
Let’s say that a review takes 10 minutes without this new tech. With the new tech the review takes 30 seconds. So now a single radiologist can do 120 reviews an hour instead of 6. That’s great, as every radiologist will make way more money.
And also more radiology consults will be done because things that are too expensive and time consuming now become quick and cheaper.
Most of them don’t suffer, they do better.
Again, this isn’t a situation where any radiologists are getting fired and any solution that doesn’t involve radiologists is stupid since you still need humans to confirm and take responsibility for diagnosis or confirmation.