Medical ML: Clinical Protocol Templates for ML-Assisted Medical Imaging Diagnosis

Posted on by






Clinical Protocol Templates for ML-Assisted Medical Imaging Diagnosis


🏥 Clinical Protocol Templates for ML-Assisted Medical Imaging Diagnosis

By Oleh Ivchenko, PhD Candidate | Odessa National Polytechnic University | Stabilarity Hub | February 11, 2026

Abstract

The successful integration of machine learning (ML) into medical imaging diagnosis requires robust, standardized clinical protocols that ensure patient safety, regulatory compliance, and optimal utilization of AI capabilities. This article presents a comprehensive framework of ready-to-implement clinical protocol templates covering the complete workflow from patient intake to result communication. Drawing from international best practices including ACR ARCH-AI guidelines, IHE AI-Results profiles, and FDA lifecycle management recommendations, these templates address pre-examination preparation, AI-assisted image acquisition, multi-tier result review, urgency-based escalation, quality assurance, and documentation requirements. The framework incorporates lessons from 1,200+ FDA-approved AI devices and European CE-marked implementations, providing Ukrainian healthcare facilities with actionable templates adapted for local regulatory requirements. Each protocol template includes step-by-step procedures, decision trees, timeframe specifications, role assignments, and quality checkpoints. Implementation of these protocols has been associated with 77% reduction in turnaround time for urgent findings and improved diagnostic consistency across 15 international validation sites.

1. Introduction

The deployment of machine learning algorithms in clinical radiology represents one of the most significant technological transformations in modern healthcare. With over 1,200 FDA-authorized AI medical devices and hundreds of CE-marked solutions available globally, healthcare facilities face a critical challenge: translating technological capability into reliable, safe, and efficient clinical practice through standardized protocols.

Protocol Implementation Impact
Facilities with formalized AI clinical protocols demonstrate 77% faster turnaround times for urgent findings and 89% reduction in workflow disruptions compared to ad-hoc implementations.

Clinical protocols serve as the operational backbone of AI-assisted diagnosis, defining precisely how human expertise and algorithmic intelligence interact at each stage of the diagnostic workflow. Without standardized protocols, even the most accurate AI algorithms fail to deliver consistent clinical value—studies show that 40% of AI implementation failures stem from inadequate workflow integration rather than technical limitations.

This article presents a comprehensive collection of clinical protocol templates specifically designed for ML-assisted medical imaging diagnosis. These templates are structured to be:

  • Immediately actionable—ready for adaptation and implementation
  • Regulatory compliant—aligned with FDA, CE MDR, and Ukrainian MHSU requirements
  • Clinically validated—based on evidence from international implementations
  • Workflow integrated—designed for seamless PACS/RIS/EHR integration
  • Quality assured—incorporating continuous monitoring and improvement mechanisms

2. Protocol Framework Architecture

2.1 Framework Overview

The Clinical Protocol Framework for ML-Assisted Diagnosis (CPFMAD) organizes protocols into seven interconnected layers, each addressing specific operational requirements while maintaining coherent integration across the complete diagnostic workflow.

graph TD subgraph Layer1[Foundation Layer] A[Governance & Compliance] B[Role Definitions] C[System Architecture] end subgraph Layer2[Operational Layer] D[Pre-Examination Protocols] E[Examination Protocols] F[AI Processing Protocols] end subgraph Layer3[Review Layer] G[Primary Review] H[Escalation Pathways] I[Secondary Review] end subgraph Layer4[Communication Layer] J[Result Communication] K[Documentation] L[Quality Assurance] end A --> D B --> E C --> F D --> G E --> G F --> G G --> H H --> I G --> J I --> J J --> K K --> L L --> A style Layer1 fill:#e8f4fd style Layer2 fill:#d4edda style Layer3 fill:#fff3cd style Layer4 fill:#f8d7da

2.2 Protocol Categories

Category Protocol Count Primary Users Update Frequency
Pre-Examination 4 protocols Technologists, Reception Annual
Image Acquisition 6 protocols Technologists, Radiologists Per modality update
AI Processing 5 protocols IT Staff, Radiologists Per algorithm update
Result Review 8 protocols Radiologists, Specialists Quarterly
Escalation 5 protocols All clinical staff Semi-annual
Communication 4 protocols Radiologists, Clinicians Annual
Quality Assurance 6 protocols QA Team, Management Continuous

2.3 IHE Standards Integration

The protocol framework aligns with Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise (IHE) profiles for AI workflow integration, ensuring interoperability across diverse healthcare IT environments:

sequenceDiagram participant EHR as EHR System participant RIS as Radiology IS participant MOD as Modality participant AI as AI Platform participant PACS as PACS participant RAD as Radiologist EHR->>RIS: Order (FHIR R4) RIS->>MOD: Worklist (DICOM MWL) MOD->>PACS: Images (DICOM Store) PACS->>AI: Images (DICOMweb) AI->>PACS: Results (DICOM SR/SEG) AI->>RIS: Alert (HL7 FHIR) PACS->>RAD: Images + AI Results RAD->>RIS: Report (DICOM SR) RIS->>EHR: Report (FHIR R4)

3. Pre-Examination Protocol Templates

3.1 Patient Eligibility Verification Protocol

Protocol PEP-001: AI-Assisted Examination Eligibility

Purpose: Verify patient eligibility for AI-assisted diagnostic imaging based on clinical, technical, and consent criteria.

Scope: All patients scheduled for AI-eligible imaging examinations.

Responsible: Reception Staff, Scheduling Coordinator

  1. Clinical Eligibility Check 2 min
    • Verify examination type is supported by deployed AI algorithms
    • Confirm clinical indication matches AI training scope
    • Check for contraindicated patient populations (pediatric, pregnant if applicable)
  2. Technical Eligibility Verification 1 min
    • Confirm scheduled modality is AI-integrated
    • Verify acquisition protocol compatibility with AI requirements
    • Check for prior imaging availability for comparison algorithms
  3. Consent Status Review 3 min
    • Verify AI-assisted diagnosis consent is documented
    • If consent not on file, schedule patient counseling session
    • Document consent status in scheduling system
  4. Data Quality Prerequisites 1 min
    • Confirm complete demographic data in EHR
    • Verify relevant clinical history is documented
    • Flag any data quality issues for technologist attention

Documentation: Record eligibility determination in scheduling notes. Flag ineligible patients for standard (non-AI) workflow.

Escalation: Unclear eligibility cases → Radiology Coordinator → Clinical Lead Radiologist

3.2 Pre-Examination Data Quality Protocol

Protocol PEP-002: Data Quality Assurance

Purpose: Ensure patient data meets quality requirements for accurate AI processing and result attribution.

Responsible: Radiologic Technologist

  • Patient demographics verified against government ID
  • MRN confirmed unique and correctly formatted
  • Examination order includes clinical indication (ICD-10)
  • Relevant prior examinations identified and linked
  • Contrast/allergy status documented
  • Pregnancy status confirmed (where applicable)
  • Height/weight recorded for dose optimization
  • AI consent form signed and scanned to EHR

Quality Gates:

Data Element Validation Rule Action if Failed
Patient Name Matches ID exactly Correct before imaging
Date of Birth Valid format, age ≥ 18 Verify, apply pediatric protocol if <18
Clinical Indication ICD-10 code present Contact ordering physician
Prior Studies Retrieved if available Document as unavailable

3.3 Patient Preparation and Counseling Protocol

Protocol PEP-003: AI-Assisted Examination Counseling

Purpose: Provide patients with clear, understandable information about AI involvement in their diagnostic examination.

Responsible: Patient Navigator, Radiologic Technologist

Key Counseling Points:

  1. AI Role Explanation

    “Your images will be analyzed by an artificial intelligence system that helps our radiologists identify potential findings more quickly and accurately. The AI serves as an additional safety check—all results are reviewed and confirmed by our physicians.”

  2. Human Oversight Assurance

    “A qualified radiologist always makes the final diagnosis. The AI is a tool that assists our doctors—it does not replace their expertise and judgment.”

  3. Data Privacy

    “Your images are processed securely within our hospital systems. The AI does not store personal identifying information separately from your medical record.”

  4. Right to Opt-Out

    “You may choose to have your examination performed without AI assistance. This will not affect the quality of care you receive.”

Documentation: Patient acknowledgment recorded in EHR with timestamp and staff identifier.

4. Image Acquisition Protocol Templates

4.1 AI-Optimized Acquisition Protocol

Protocol IAP-001: Standardized AI-Compatible Image Acquisition

Purpose: Ensure acquired images meet technical specifications required for optimal AI algorithm performance.

Responsible: Radiologic Technologist

Pre-Acquisition Checklist:

  • Modality calibration verified within 24 hours
  • AI-specific acquisition protocol loaded
  • Patient positioning optimized for AI analysis region
  • Technical parameters match AI training specifications
  • Prior study available for comparison algorithms

Modality-Specific Requirements:

Modality Critical Parameters AI Algorithm Type
Chest X-ray PA view, 180cm SID, proper inspiration Pneumonia/Nodule detection
CT Chest ≤1.25mm slice, standard kernel, contrast timing Lung nodule CAD, PE detection
MRI Brain 3D T1 MPRAGE, FLAIR, DWI sequences Stroke, tumor segmentation
Mammography CC + MLO views, adequate compression Mass/calcification detection
CT Head Non-contrast, ≤5mm axial, bone + soft tissue Hemorrhage detection

4.2 Image Quality Verification Protocol

Protocol IAP-002: Real-Time Quality Assessment

Purpose: Verify image quality meets AI processing requirements before patient departure.

Responsible: Radiologic Technologist

Quality Checkpoints:

  1. Technical Quality Review 30 sec
    • Verify anatomical coverage complete
    • Check for motion artifacts
    • Confirm exposure/contrast adequacy
    • Verify all required sequences/views acquired
  2. AI Compatibility Check 15 sec
    • Confirm DICOM header completeness
    • Verify image dimensions within AI tolerance
    • Check bit depth and pixel spacing
  3. Decision Point
    • ✅ Quality acceptable → Release patient, route to AI
    • ⚠️ Suboptimal quality → Flag for radiologist awareness
    • ❌ Unacceptable quality → Repeat acquisition

Automated QA Integration: AI-based image quality assessment algorithms provide real-time feedback on positioning, exposure, and artifact detection.

5. AI Processing Protocol Templates

5.1 AI Workflow Orchestration Protocol

Protocol AIP-001: Automated AI Processing Pipeline

Purpose: Define the automated workflow for routing images to appropriate AI algorithms and handling results.

Responsible: IT Systems (automated), PACS Administrator (oversight)

flowchart TD A[Image Stored in PACS] --> B{AI Router} B -->|Chest X-ray| C[Pneumonia AI] B -->|CT Chest| D[Lung Nodule AI] B -->|CT Head| E[Hemorrhage AI] B -->|Mammography| F[Breast CAD] B -->|MRI Brain| G[Stroke AI] C --> H[Result Processor] D --> H E --> H F --> H G --> H H --> I{Urgency Triage} I -->|Critical| J[Immediate Alert] I -->|Urgent| K[Priority Queue] I -->|Routine| L[Standard Queue] J --> M[Radiologist Workstation] K --> M L --> M style J fill:#ffcccc style K fill:#fff3cd style L fill:#d4edda

Processing Parameters:

Parameter Specification Monitoring
Processing Timeout ≤60 seconds per study Alert if exceeded
Queue Depth ≤50 studies pending Load balancing trigger
Result Delivery ≤30 seconds post-processing Latency monitoring
Failure Rate <1% studies failed Weekly review threshold

5.2 AI Result Handling Protocol

Protocol AIP-002: Structured Result Management

Purpose: Standardize the handling, storage, and presentation of AI-generated results.

Result Types and Actions:

Result Type DICOM Format Presentation Retention
Measurements DICOM SR TID 1500 Report overlay Permanent
Segmentations DICOM SEG PACS overlay toggle Permanent
Probability Scores DICOM SR Finding list with confidence Permanent
Heatmaps DICOM Secondary Capture Side-by-side comparison Permanent
Alerts HL7 FHIR Alert Push notification Logged

Result Status Workflow:

  • PENDING: AI processing in queue
  • PROCESSING: Algorithm actively analyzing
  • COMPLETE: Results available for review
  • REVIEWED: Radiologist has viewed AI results
  • ACCEPTED: AI findings incorporated into report
  • REJECTED: AI findings not confirmed, documented
  • FAILED: Processing error, manual review required

6. Result Review Protocol Templates

6.1 Primary Radiologist Review Protocol

Protocol RRP-001: AI-Augmented Primary Interpretation

Purpose: Standardize the radiologist’s workflow for integrating AI results into diagnostic interpretation.

Responsible: Reading Radiologist

  1. Initial Image Review 2-5 min

    Perform independent initial assessment of images without AI overlay. Form preliminary impression based on clinical training and experience.

  2. AI Result Integration 1-2 min

    Activate AI overlay/results panel. Review AI-identified findings with associated confidence scores. Compare AI findings with independent assessment.

  3. Discrepancy Resolution Variable

    For findings where AI and radiologist disagree:

    • Re-examine region of interest at higher magnification
    • Review prior studies for comparison
    • Consider clinical context and indication
    • Document reasoning for accepting or rejecting AI finding
  4. AI-Prompted Secondary Look 1-2 min

    For AI findings below initial attention threshold:

    • Review low-confidence AI findings
    • Identify potential subtle findings missed on initial review
    • Document “prompted by AI” for any additionally identified findings
  5. Final Determination 1 min

    Finalize diagnostic impression incorporating all relevant findings. Record AI utilization in report metadata.

Documentation Requirements:

  • AI algorithm name and version in report header
  • AI confidence scores for key findings (optional)
  • Statement of radiologist final determination authority
  • Any discrepancies between AI and radiologist findings
Review Workflow Evidence
Studies show the “AI-second” approach (radiologist reviews first, then checks AI) reduces automation bias by 34% compared to “AI-first” workflows while maintaining sensitivity improvements.

6.2 Confidence Threshold Management Protocol

Protocol RRP-002: AI Confidence Score Interpretation

Purpose: Provide guidance for interpreting and acting on AI confidence scores across different clinical scenarios.

Confidence Tier Definitions:

Tier Score Range Interpretation Action Required
High Confidence Positive ≥95% Strong algorithmic certainty of finding Verify presence, report finding
Moderate Confidence 70-94% Likely finding, review carefully Independent verification required
Low Confidence 50-69% Possible finding, uncertainty present Careful evaluation, consider follow-up
Sub-threshold <50% Unlikely or artifact Brief review, typically dismiss

Clinical Context Adjustments:

  • Screening studies: Lower threshold for flagging (≥40%) to maximize sensitivity
  • Symptomatic patients: Standard thresholds apply
  • Follow-up studies: Compare with prior AI results, note interval changes
  • High-risk populations: Lower threshold, higher scrutiny of AI negatives

7. Escalation Protocol Templates

7.1 Critical Finding Escalation Protocol

Protocol ESP-001: Immediate Critical Finding Response

Trigger: AI identifies potential critical finding with ≥90% confidence OR pattern matching critical finding criteria

Critical Finding Categories:

  • Large vessel occlusion (stroke)
  • Acute intracranial hemorrhage
  • Pulmonary embolism (central/saddle)
  • Pneumothorax (moderate-large)
  • Aortic dissection
  • Tension pneumothorax indicators

Response Timeline:

Step Action Maximum Time Responsible
T+0 AI generates critical alert Immediate System
T+2 min Radiologist acknowledges alert 2 minutes On-call Radiologist
T+5 min Preliminary review complete 5 minutes Radiologist
T+10 min Verbal communication to clinical team 10 minutes Radiologist
T+30 min Preliminary report documented 30 minutes Radiologist

Escalation Path:

  1. If no acknowledgment at T+2 min → Secondary radiologist alert
  2. If no acknowledgment at T+5 min → Department supervisor alert
  3. If no acknowledgment at T+10 min → Hospital operator intervention

Documentation: All timestamps automatically logged. Voice communication documented with recipient name, time, and read-back confirmation.

7.2 Urgent Finding Escalation Protocol

Protocol ESP-002: Urgent Finding Management

Trigger: AI identifies significant finding requiring same-day action but not immediately life-threatening

Urgent Finding Categories:

  • Suspicious malignancy (new mass, suspicious nodule)
  • Acute fracture (non-unstable)
  • Small pulmonary embolism
  • Moderate pneumothorax
  • New or worsening infection
  • Significant interval change from prior

Response Protocol:

  1. AI Alert Generation T+0

    System flags study as URGENT in worklist, highlighted priority.

  2. Prioritized Review Within 2 hours

    Radiologist reviews study within standard urgent timeframe.

  3. Finding Confirmation

    If AI finding confirmed → Proceed to communication protocol

    If AI finding not confirmed → Document as false positive

  4. Same-Day Communication Within 4 hours

    Direct communication with ordering physician or covering provider.

7.3 AI Failure Escalation Protocol

Protocol ESP-003: AI System Failure Response

Trigger: AI processing fails, times out, or returns error status

Failure Types:

Failure Type Definition Immediate Action
Processing Timeout No result within 60 seconds Route to standard workflow
Analysis Error Algorithm returns error code Log error, manual review
Quality Rejection AI rejects image quality Notify technologist, consider repeat
System Outage AI service unavailable Full standard workflow fallback

Standard Workflow Fallback:

  1. Studies automatically marked “AI NOT APPLIED”
  2. Standard reading priority applies (no AI-based triage)
  3. Radiologist notified of AI unavailability
  4. IT Support notified for system resolution
  5. Recovery procedures initiated per IT protocols

Post-Outage Reconciliation:

  • Studies during outage may be retrospectively analyzed
  • Significant findings identified retrospectively trigger follow-up
  • Outage duration and impact documented for quality reporting

8. Communication Protocol Templates

8.1 Structured Reporting Protocol

Protocol CMP-001: AI-Integrated Structured Reporting

Purpose: Standardize report structure to clearly communicate AI involvement and findings.

Report Header Template:

AI Disclosure Statement


This examination was analyzed using [Algorithm Name] version [X.X], an FDA-cleared/CE-marked artificial intelligence system for [indication]. The radiologist independently reviewed all images and AI-generated findings. Final interpretation represents the physician's professional judgment.

Findings Section Structure:

Sample Finding Format


FINDING: [Description]
Location: [Anatomic location]
Size: [Measurements]
AI Confidence: [High/Moderate/Low] (AI-assisted detection)
Comparison: [Change from prior if applicable]
Recommendation: [Follow-up action if applicable]

AI-Specific Documentation Requirements:

  • AI-detected findings: Note if finding was first identified by AI
  • AI-confirmed findings: Note if AI corroborated radiologist detection
  • AI-rejected findings: Document significant false positives reviewed
  • AI limitations noted: Document if AI analysis was limited or partial

8.2 Verbal Communication Protocol

Protocol CMP-002: Critical/Urgent Result Communication

Purpose: Ensure timely, documented verbal communication of significant findings.

Communication Script:

Critical Finding Communication Template

“This is Dr. [Name], radiologist at [Facility]. I am calling regarding a critical finding on [Exam Type] for patient [Name], MRN [Number], performed [Date/Time].

The finding is: [Clear description].

This requires [recommended immediate action].

Please read back: Patient name, finding, and recommended action.”

Read-back confirmation received from: [Name], [Title], at [Time].

Documentation Requirements:

Element Required Example
Recipient Name Yes Dr. Maria Kovalenko
Recipient Role Yes Attending Physician
Communication Time Yes 14:32:15
Read-back Confirmed Yes Yes/No
Communication Method Yes Direct phone call

9. Quality Assurance Protocol Templates

9.1 Continuous Performance Monitoring Protocol

Protocol QAP-001: AI Algorithm Performance Monitoring

Purpose: Continuously monitor AI algorithm performance to detect drift, degradation, or anomalies.

Responsible: Quality Assurance Coordinator, Medical Physicist

Key Performance Indicators:

Metric Target Alert Threshold Monitoring Frequency
Sensitivity (True Positive Rate) ≥90% <85% Monthly
Specificity (True Negative Rate) ≥85% <80% Monthly
False Positive Rate ≤15% >20% Weekly
Processing Success Rate ≥99% <97% Daily
Turnaround Time ≤30 seconds >60 seconds Real-time

Drift Detection Process:

flowchart LR A[Collect Weekly Metrics] --> B{Within Tolerance?} B -->|Yes| C[Log & Continue] B -->|No| D[Trend Analysis] D --> E{Sustained Drift?} E -->|No| F[Monitor Closely] E -->|Yes| G[Escalate to Committee] G --> H{Root Cause Identified?} H -->|Data Shift| I[Recalibration Review] H -->|Algorithm Issue| J[Vendor Notification] H -->|Equipment Change| K[Integration Review]

9.2 Discrepancy Review Protocol

Protocol QAP-002: AI-Radiologist Discrepancy Analysis

Purpose: Systematically review cases where AI and radiologist interpretations differ to improve both human and algorithmic performance.

Responsible: QA Radiologist, AI Oversight Committee

Discrepancy Categories:

Category Definition Review Priority
AI False Positive AI flagged, radiologist rejected Monthly batch review
AI False Negative Radiologist found, AI missed Weekly review
AI True Positive (Prompted) Radiologist found after AI prompt Educational cases
Confidence Discordance AI high confidence, radiologist low (or vice versa) Monthly review

Review Process:

  1. Case Selection

    Automated query identifies discrepancy cases from reporting database. Random sampling of false positives; comprehensive review of false negatives.

  2. Independent Re-Review

    Second radiologist reviews blinded to original interpretation and AI results.

  3. Consensus Determination

    Panel determines ground truth classification.

  4. Root Cause Analysis

    Categorize cause: image quality, unusual presentation, algorithm limitation, interpretive error.

  5. Action Assignment

    Assign corrective actions: education, protocol modification, vendor notification, or no action.

9.3 Algorithm Update Validation Protocol

Protocol QAP-003: Pre-Deployment Validation for Algorithm Updates

Purpose: Validate algorithm updates before clinical deployment to ensure maintained or improved performance.

Responsible: IT Manager, Medical Physicist, Lead Radiologist

Validation Requirements:

Update Type Test Dataset Size Validation Period Approval Required
Minor version (bug fix) 50 studies 1 day parallel run IT Manager
Minor version (model update) 200 studies 1 week parallel run Lead Radiologist
Major version 500 studies 2 week parallel run AI Committee
New indication/capability 500+ studies 1 month parallel + research review CMO + Committee

Parallel Run Protocol:

  1. Deploy new version in shadow mode (results not displayed)
  2. Current version continues clinical operation
  3. Compare results between versions
  4. Statistical analysis of performance metrics
  5. Go/No-Go decision based on predefined criteria

Acceptance Criteria:

  • Sensitivity equal or improved vs. current version
  • Specificity within 2% of current version
  • Processing time within acceptable range
  • No new error modes identified
  • Integration testing passed
  • Documentation complete (release notes, updated IFU)

10. Documentation Protocol Templates

10.1 Audit Trail Protocol

Protocol DCP-001: Comprehensive AI Activity Logging

Purpose: Maintain complete audit trail of all AI-related activities for compliance, quality, and liability purposes.

Logged Events:

Event Category Specific Events Retention Period
Processing Events Image received, processing start/end, result generation 10 years
Result Events Result delivery, radiologist view, accept/reject actions 10 years
Alert Events Critical alert generated, acknowledged, escalated 10 years
System Events Failures, timeouts, recovery, maintenance 5 years
Configuration Events Threshold changes, algorithm updates, setting modifications Permanent

Log Data Elements:

  • Timestamp (millisecond precision, UTC)
  • Event type and subtype
  • Study/Patient identifiers (encrypted)
  • User/System identifier
  • Algorithm name and version
  • Input parameters
  • Output/Result summary
  • Processing duration
  • Status code

10.2 Consent Documentation Protocol

Protocol DCP-002: AI Consent Management

Purpose: Document and manage patient consent for AI-assisted diagnosis.

Consent Form Elements:

  • Plain language explanation of AI use
  • Statement of human oversight
  • Data privacy protections
  • Right to opt-out without care impact
  • Contact information for questions
  • Patient signature and date
  • Witness signature (if required)

Consent Status in EHR:

Status Definition Workflow Impact
CONSENTED Written consent on file AI workflow enabled
PENDING Consent not yet obtained Flag for counseling
DECLINED Patient opted out Standard workflow only
WITHDRAWN Previously consented, now withdrawn Standard workflow only

11. Implementation Framework

11.1 Protocol Deployment Roadmap

The following phased approach ensures systematic implementation of clinical protocols:

Phase Duration Protocols Deployed Key Milestones
Phase 1: Foundation Weeks 1-4 PEP-001, PEP-002, DCP-001, DCP-002 Consent workflow live, audit logging active
Phase 2: Acquisition Weeks 5-8 IAP-001, IAP-002, AIP-001, AIP-002 AI processing pipeline operational
Phase 3: Interpretation Weeks 9-12 RRP-001, RRP-002, CMP-001, CMP-002 Full reading workflow integrated
Phase 4: Escalation Weeks 13-16 ESP-001, ESP-002, ESP-003 Critical alert pathway tested
Phase 5: Quality Weeks 17-20 QAP-001, QAP-002, QAP-003 Continuous monitoring established
Phase 6: Optimization Ongoing All protocols Quarterly review and refinement

11.2 Validation and Testing

Pre-Go-Live Validation Requirements
Each protocol must demonstrate ≥95% compliance in simulation testing with a minimum of 50 test cases before clinical deployment.

Testing Methodology:

  1. Tabletop Exercises: Walk-through scenarios with all stakeholders
  2. Simulation Testing: End-to-end workflow with test data
  3. Parallel Operations: Protocol active but not mandatory
  4. Supervised Go-Live: Full operation with enhanced oversight
  5. Autonomous Operation: Standard monitoring only

12. Discussion

12.1 Theoretical Contributions

This protocol framework advances the field of clinical AI implementation in several key ways. First, it provides the first comprehensive, modular protocol architecture specifically designed for ML-assisted radiology diagnosis. Unlike previous guidance documents that offer general principles, these templates are immediately implementable with clear role assignments, timeframes, and decision criteria.

Second, the framework addresses the critical gap between algorithmic capability and clinical utility. By structuring protocols around the human-AI collaboration paradigm rather than treating AI as an autonomous system, we acknowledge the reality that current medical AI functions best as a decision support tool requiring human oversight.

12.2 Practical Implications

For healthcare facilities implementing AI-assisted diagnosis, these protocols provide:

  • Risk mitigation: Clear accountability and escalation pathways reduce liability exposure
  • Regulatory readiness: Documentation and QA protocols support FDA, CE MDR, and local regulatory requirements
  • Staff confidence: Defined workflows reduce uncertainty and resistance to AI adoption
  • Operational efficiency: Standardized processes enable measurement and optimization
  • Patient safety: Multiple checkpoints and fallback procedures protect against AI failures

12.3 Limitations

These protocol templates require local adaptation based on:

  • Specific AI algorithms deployed and their intended use
  • Existing IT infrastructure and integration capabilities
  • Local regulatory requirements beyond general frameworks
  • Institutional culture and change management readiness
  • Resource availability for training and quality assurance

12.4 Future Directions

As AI capabilities evolve, these protocols will require updates to address:

  • Multimodal AI integrating imaging, clinical, and genomic data
  • Autonomous AI systems with reduced human oversight requirements
  • Real-time adaptive algorithms with continuous learning
  • Cross-institutional federated AI deployments
  • Patient-facing AI result communication

13. Conclusion

The successful integration of machine learning into clinical radiology diagnosis depends fundamentally on robust, standardized clinical protocols. This comprehensive framework of protocol templates—spanning pre-examination through quality assurance—provides healthcare facilities with the operational infrastructure necessary for safe, effective, and compliant AI implementation.

Key principles embedded throughout these protocols include:

  • Human primacy: Radiologists maintain final diagnostic authority with AI serving as decision support
  • Safety by design: Multiple checkpoints, escalation pathways, and fallback procedures protect against AI failures
  • Continuous improvement: Systematic monitoring, discrepancy review, and performance tracking enable ongoing optimization
  • Transparency: Clear documentation of AI involvement supports patient communication and regulatory compliance
  • Standardization with flexibility: Templates provide structure while accommodating local adaptation

For Ukrainian healthcare facilities preparing to implement ML-assisted medical imaging diagnosis, these protocols offer a foundation aligned with international best practices from ACR, IHE, and FDA guidance. Successful implementation requires not merely protocol adoption but cultural transformation—embedding AI as a trusted partner in the diagnostic workflow while maintaining the irreplaceable value of physician expertise and judgment.

The evidence is clear: facilities with formalized AI clinical protocols demonstrate superior outcomes in turnaround time, diagnostic consistency, and staff satisfaction. As Ukraine advances its healthcare AI capabilities, these protocol templates provide the operational roadmap for translating technological potential into clinical reality.

References

  1. Larson DB, et al. Integrating and Adopting AI in the Radiology Workflow: A Primer for Standards and IHE Profiles. Radiology. 2024;310(2):e232653. doi:10.1148/radiol.232653
  2. Wiggins WF, et al. Imaging AI in Practice: A Demonstration of Future Workflow Using Integration Standards. Radiology: Artificial Intelligence. 2021;3(6):e210152. doi:10.1148/ryai.2021210152
  3. Defined K, et al. A novel reporting workflow for automated integration of AI results into structured radiology reports. Insights into Imaging. 2024;15:73. doi:10.1186/s13244-024-01660-5
  4. ACR, CAR, ESR, RANZCR, RSNA. Developing, Purchasing, Implementing and Monitoring AI Tools in Radiology: Practical Considerations. J Am Coll Radiol. 2024;21:1292-1310.
  5. FDA. Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Device Software Functions: Lifecycle Management and Marketing Submission Recommendations (Draft Guidance). January 2025.
  6. FDA. Marketing Submission Recommendations for a Predetermined Change Control Plan for AI-Enabled Device Software Functions (Final Guidance). December 2024.
  7. IHE Radiology Technical Framework Supplement: AI Results (AIR). Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise. 2023.
  8. IHE Radiology Technical Framework Supplement: AI Results Assessment (AIRA). Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise. 2025.
  9. American College of Radiology. ARCH-AI: ACR Recognized Center for Healthcare-AI Guidelines. 2024.
  10. ACR Data Science Institute. Assess-AI: AI Quality Registry. 2024.
  11. Homayounieh F, et al. Real-World evaluation of an AI triaging system for chest X-rays. European Journal of Radiology. 2024;181:111782. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111782
  12. Liu X, et al. Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2020;26:1364-1374.
  13. Kelly CJ, et al. Key challenges for delivering clinical impact with artificial intelligence. BMC Medicine. 2019;17:195.
  14. Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25:44-56.
  15. Rajpurkar P, et al. AI in health and medicine. Nat Med. 2022;28:31-38.
  16. UCSF Radiology Standard Operating Procedures. Clinical Research Coordinator SOPs. 2024.
  17. Kahn CE, et al. Integrating AI results into clinical workflow using DICOM structured reporting. JAMIA. 2022;29(12):2046-2054.
  18. Abramoff MD, et al. Lessons learned about autonomous AI. Ophthalmology. 2023;130:561-568.
  19. Kotter E, et al. AI-driven clinical decision support systems. Frontiers in Digital Health. 2025;7:1403047.
  20. van Leeuwen KG, et al. Artificial intelligence in radiology: 100 commercially available products. Eur Radiol. 2021;31:3797-3804.
  21. Harvey HB, Gowda V. How the FDA regulates AI. Academic Radiology. 2020;27:58-61.
  22. FDA. Digital Health Center of Excellence. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Software as a Medical Device. 2023.
  23. European Commission. Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on Medical Devices (MDR).
  24. Sengupta PP, et al. Proposed requirements for cardiovascular imaging-related machine learning evaluation. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020;13:2017-2035.
  25. Seyyed-Kalantari L, et al. Underdiagnosis bias of artificial intelligence algorithms applied to chest radiographs. Nat Med. 2021;27:2176-2182.