Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41489842›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Potential change in healthcare costs of implementing artificial intelligence for detecting cervical spine fractures on CT: an early health technology assessment.

Gaby J van den Wittenboer, Ingrid M Nijholt, Ingelin Kvamme, Chris van Lieshout, Mario Maas, Martijn F Boomsma

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gaby J van den WittenboerDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands. g.j.wittenboer@isala.nl.
Ingrid M NijholtDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands. i.m.nijholt@isala.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4820-7505
Ingelin KvammeDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Economics, Julius Center, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Chris van LieshoutDepartment of Epidemiology and Health Economics, Julius Center, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mario MaasDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centres, location Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martijn F BoomsmaDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands.

Funding

AIDOC n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess healthcare costs of patients screened for cervical spine (C-spine) fractures using CT, and estimate the change in in-hospital costs if an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm for C-spine fracture detection would assist the radiologist as concurrent reader. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective, early health technology assessment included 2321 consecutive patients (2007-2014; median age 49 years; 61% male) screened for C-spine fractures using CT, of whom 219 patients with fractures. Healthcare costs were calculated per diagnostic category (true positive, true negative, false positive and false negative) based on the diagnosis made by the attending radiologists, and by AI analysis, compared to the reference standard. The potential diagnostic accuracy measures with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for diagnoses made by radiologists assisted by AI and the potential average cost per diagnostic category in this scenario were estimated.

resultsRadiologists identified 193/219 fractures and 2085/2102 scans without fractures. AI identified 23 fractures and 16 scans without fractures that had been misclassified by the radiologists. This resulted in a potential sensitivity of 216/219 (98.6%, 95% CI: 95.7-99.6, 10.5% increase compared to radiologists) and specificity of 2101/2102 (100.0%, 95% CI: 99.7-100, 0.8% increase compared to radiologists) for the AI-assisted scenario. The total cost for the AI-assisted scenario was €60,862 (0.3%) higher than for radiologists alone.

conclusionIn this scenario analysis, the addition of AI as concurrent reader to radiologists was estimated to potentially increase sensitivity by 10.5% and specificity by 0.8% together with a 0.3% increase in in-hospital costs due to more detected fractures. KEY POINTS: Question The impact of artificial intelligence to detect cervical spine fractures on CT on in-hospital healthcare resource use and costs is unknown. Findings Assistance by AI could potentially improve radiologists' sensitivity and specificity by 10.5% and 0.8%, respectively, for an additional healthcare cost increase of just 0.3%. Clinical relevance Using artificial intelligence as concurrent reader to radiologists to detect cervical spine fractures on CT could potentially increase diagnostic accuracy to nearly 100% with a minimal increase in in-hospital healthcare resource costs.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCervical VertebraeHealth Care CostsImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedSpinal FracturesTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAlgorithmsFemaleHumansIntelligent SystemsMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityArtificial intelligenceCervical vertebraeCosts and cost analysisSpinal injuriesTomography (spiral computed)

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.