Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835
Books209
All textbooksMedical textbooksHuman anatomyOrganisms & biodiversityOther sciences
Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›Open textbooks›Ethical implications of the use of AI-based technologies for medical image classification systems in screening: a qualitative systematic review›Additional information

Continue where you left off ()

GO BEYOND THE PAGEReading is just the beginning.

Turn scientific reading into research. Compare studies, examine evidence, and organize your findings in EvidenceHelix Workspace.

Explore Research Workspace →

Ethical implications of the use of AI-based technologies for medical image classification systems in screening: a qualitative systematic review · Additional information

Additional information

CC BY 4.0 · National Institute for Health and Care Research · approximately 2 min read

CRediT contribution statement

Melina Vasileiou (https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3516-277X): Conceptualisation (equal), Investigation (lead), Methodology (lead), Data curation (lead), Formal analysis (lead), Writing – original draft (lead).

Victoria Wakefield (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2058-6411): Investigation (supporting), Methodology (supporting), Validation (supporting), Writing – original draft (supporting).

Clare Dadswell (https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6805-0753): Validation (equal), Writing – original draft (supporting), Supervision (supporting).

Steven J Edwards (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9049-3421): Conceptualisation (lead), Funding acquisition (lead), Validation (lead), Writing – original draft (supporting), Supervision (lead).

Acknowledgements

The External Assessment Group (EAG) would like to thank Dr Nisha Sharma (Director of Breast Screening and Clinical Lead for breast imaging, Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust) and Ms Sarah Meredith (Consultant Ophthalmologist, Portsmouth Hospital University NHS Trust and Medical Director of InHealth Intelligence) for providing clinical advice via teleconference and feedback on the report. The EAG would also like to thank Dr Janet Litherland (Consultant Breast Radiologist, West of Scotland Breast Screening Service, Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board) for providing feedback on the report. The EAG would also like to thank the UK NSC Evidence Team members Dr Cristina Visintin, Dr David Thompson, and Dr Omaer Syed for developing the original review question and providing feedback throughout the project.

Data-sharing statement

All data requests should be submitted to the corresponding author for consideration. Any queries should be addressed to the corresponding author.

Ethics statement

No ethical approval was needed as all included data were from secondary published sources.

Information governance statement

This study did not handle any personal data because it was a systematic review of previously published studies, and therefore all data analysed were already publicly available. For any queries on Information Governance related to this project, please contact the corresponding author.

Disclosure of interests

Full disclosure of interests: Completed ICMJE forms for all authors, including all related interests, are available in the toolkit on the NIHR Journals Library report publication page at https://doi.org/10.3310/GJSE4912.

Primary conflicts of interest: None declared.

Disclaimer

Every effort has been made to obtain the necessary permissions for reproduction, to credit original sources appropriately and to respect copyright requirements. However, despite our diligence, we acknowledge the possibility of unintentional omissions or errors and we welcome notifications of any concerns regarding copyright or permissions.

Disclaimers

This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, the HTA programme or the Department of Health and Social Care. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, the HTA programme or the Department of Health and Social Care.

← ReferencesList of supplementary material →

Attribution. Melina Vasileiou; Victoria Wakefield; Clare Dadswell; Steven J Edwards (2026). Ethical implications of the use of AI-based technologies for medical image classification systems in screening: a qualitative systematic review. National Institute for Health and Care Research. Copyright © 2026 Vasileiou et al. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. NCBI Bookshelf NBK623491. CC BY 4.0. Original source ↗. Text reproduced from the Bookshelf XML without changing wording; figures, images and supplements are not reproduced.

In this chapter Contents

  • Additional information

Source

OpenStax source file ↗

Source record ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support