logo
Radiology's Reckoning: How AI, Private Equity, And Prenovo Scans Are Unraveling It

Radiology's Reckoning: How AI, Private Equity, And Prenovo Scans Are Unraveling It

Forbes23-07-2025
MANHATTAN, NEW YORK, UNITED STATES - 2025/05/01: Sign at the entrance to the Prenuvo Clinic in ... More Manhattan. (Photo by Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)
For decades, radiology was the dream. One of the coveted R.O.A.D. specialties—Radiology, Ophthalmology, Anesthesiology, and Dermatology—it offered physicians a rare trifecta: high salaries, low burnout, and flexible hours. It was medicine's white-collar sweet spot—intellectually stimulating, well-compensated, and mostly removed from the emotional weight of patient-facing care.
Three tectonic forces—AI in radiology, private equity consolidation of radiology groups, and a booming sector of direct-to-consumer wellness imaging—are reshaping radiology into a flagging, fractured profession. The fallout? An ever-widening divide between elite specialists and commoditized labor, with little room for middle-ground.
From Reader to Validator: The Shrinking Scope of Expertise
AI isn't augmenting radiologists. It's replacing them—at least in part. Tools from companies like Aidoc, Gleamer, DeepLook and Annalise.ai now pre-read routine scans, flag abnormalities, and auto-generate structured reports. Increasingly, junior radiologists start their shifts not with raw cases but with AI-generated 'findings' they're expected to review and sign off on.
This evolution from "physician" to "validator" marks a critical shift. Human expertise is now backloaded—doctors step in after the AI has taken the first swing. It's a subtle but systemic de-skilling of the profession, part of a broader trend in knowledge work where algorithms dictate pace, volume, and standards.
Teleradiology's Uberization: No Benefits, No Protections
Nowhere is this shift more visible than in teleradiology. Many U.S.-based radiologists working remotely are classified as 1099 contractors—paid per scan, with no health insurance, no retirement plan, and no paid leave. And as AI eats away at routine reads, their bargaining power continues to shrink.
'Radiologists used to be seen as doctors,' one physician told me. 'Now, many are treated like Uber drivers for diagnostics—paid by the case, with zero security.'
These doctors are still responsible for interpreting complex studies, identifying critical findings, and ensuring patient safety. Yet they often operate outside the very healthcare protections they help uphold.
Private Equity's Rollup Strategy Is Faltering
Between 2013 and 2023, private equity firms acquired more than 150 radiology practices, representing over 3,400 imaging locations—roughly 16% of U.S. sites. By 2023, 12% of American radiologists worked for PE-backed groups, with saturation as high as 46% in states like Nevada.
But cracks are appearing. Deal flow slowed dramatically in 2023 and 2024, due to rising interest rates, post-COVID imaging declines, and reimbursement pressure. Radiology Partners, the largest PE-backed platform, raised $720 million in 2024 to manage mounting debt. Attrition rates in some PE-owned practices are hitting 30–40%, according to AuntMinnie.com.
Bridging the Gap—But Only Partially
Globally, there is a well-documented shortage of radiologists, with some hospitals facing days-long backlogs for non-emergency scans. In certain regions and emergency departments, the ability to get an immediate read can mean the difference between life and death. In these high-pressure contexts, AI tools that can quickly pre-screen and flag critical findings may serve a valuable role in accelerating decision-making for trauma cases, strokes, or internal bleeding—where time-sensitive diagnostics are essential.
That said, while AI may help close some access gaps, especially in underserved or high-volume settings, it cannot fully replace the interpretive skill, legal accountability, and contextual nuance that trained radiologists provide. Nor does it address the structural drivers behind the shortage—such as workforce burnout, declining reimbursement, and the growing reliance on contractor labor.
AI in Radiology as Arbitrage, Not Advancement
In these environments, AI isn't deployed for diagnostic precision—it's used to standardize workflows, increase volume, and cut labor costs. Instead of freeing radiologists to do more complex work, it places them under closer digital surveillance.
Rather than clinical uplift, AI becomes financial arbitrage.
A Two-Tier Profession: Specialists Protected, Generalists Squeezed
Not all radiologists are impacted equally. Subspecialists in interventional, neuro, musculoskeletal, and cardiac imaging still command high pay and institutional leverage. But generalists—who interpret routine X-rays, CTs, and ultrasounds—are increasingly commoditized.
Estimated 2024 U.S. Radiologist Compensation by Role:
Estimated 2024 U.S. Radiology Compensation by Role
This bifurcation is directly tied to earlier themes: PE-owned practices increasingly prioritize high-throughput general reads, often handled by teleradiology contractors or AI tools, while reserving higher-margin procedures for a smaller cohort of in-house specialists. The result is a two-tier system reinforced by both capital incentives and automation.
The more replaceable the scan, the more vulnerable the reader.
Radiology Demand Outpaces the Human Supply
The U.S. has around 39,000 active radiologists (ACR, Neiman HPI), growing by only about 1.5% per year—roughly adding 600 physicians annually—based on residency program capacity (AMA, ACR). Meanwhile, imaging volumes continue increasing at 3–4% annually, driven by aging demographics, chronic disease prevalence, and expanded screening guidelines (Medicus Healthcare Solutions).
What does that look like over five years?
That means demand will grow twice as fast as the workforce, leading to backlogs—emergency departments already report wait times of several hours for key scans—and regional density varies dramatically (as low as 9 radiologists per 100,000 in some areas) (ACR Workforce Survey).
And the scan landscape is becoming more complex. Women with dense breasts now require 3D mammography, supplemental ultrasound, and MRI (ACR Breast Imaging Guidelines), and emerging options like contrast-enhanced mammography and molecular breast imaging (MBI) further multiply the reading load.
Even a growing reliance on AI or gig labor won't increase the total number of trained clinicians—the problem isn't just efficiency, it's capacity.
A Global Perspective of Radiology: Different System, Different Stakes
While U.S. radiologists grapple with contractor models, PE consolidation, and unchecked AI adoption, other health systems are taking a more cautious or coordinated approach.
In the U.K., the NHS has invested in radiology AI pilots but maintains central oversight, ensuring that AI augments—not replaces—clinical judgment. The Royal College of Radiologists has emphasized that AI should relieve workforce shortages, not deskill practitioners. Radiologists remain salaried employees with pensions and protections.
Radiology doesn't have to become a gig economy casualty. Policy, public funding, and infrastructure design matter.
The Longevity Mirage: $2,500 Wellness Scans For The 1%
As clinical radiology comes under pressure, consumer-facing imaging startups have raised over $400 million to offer full-body MRI scans to affluent customers. These services operate outside traditional clinical channels—unregulated, cash-pay, and sold as luxury longevity products.
Prenuvo raised $70 million in 2022 and another $120 million in 2025 to expand its full-body and body-composition scans, priced between $2,499 and $4,499. Ezra raised $44 million before its distressed sale to Function Health in May 2025. Neko Health, founded by Spotify's Daniel Ek, is now valued at nearly $2 billion.
Clinical bodies remain unconvinced. The American College of Radiology warns that full-body MRI lacks evidence of cost-effectiveness or life-prolonging benefit, and that false positives and incidental findings can lead to unnecessary follow-ups. Even Prenuvo's own data shows a 2.2% cancer detection rate—consistent with population-wide screening programs like mammography—but with limited clarity on downstream impact. The real question isn't how many cancers are found, but whether early detection through full-body scans leads to better outcomes. Without long-term data, it's unclear if these findings result in life-saving interventions or lead to extra tests, anxiety, or even unnecessary treatment.
Ezra's Fall: From Hype to Exit
Ezra's sale in May 2025 was telling. Plagued by high burn rates and tepid consumer demand, it was acquired by Function Health under undisclosed terms. The new offering—an 'Ezra-powered' 22-minute MRI for $499/year—marks a steep discount from Ezra's earlier standalone pricing, which peaked at $6,000 per session.
The deal signals that as a standalone DTC imaging brand, Ezra was unsustainable. Integrated into a broader wellness membership model, it might endure—but with a radically different financial profile.
The Final Insult: Infrastructure Without Respect
Behind slick UX and celebrity endorsements, these startups still require radiologists to interpret scans, flag potential cancers, and provide legal sign-off. Yet many treat them not as partners, but as infrastructure.
'In some of these startups, senior software engineers make more than the radiologists reading the cancer screens,' one Prenuvo-affiliated radiologist told me. 'We're treated as regulatory obligations, not clinical equals.'
Many are hired as per-case contractors. Prenuvo and Ezra have both listed radiologist roles as remote, 1099-based, with variable pay and no guaranteed volume. The Ezra careers page as of late 2023 offered compensation 'based on image complexity' with no benefits. That structure gives startups operational flexibility—at the expense of the very physicians they rely on.
A Crossroads With No Middle Ground
Radiology's reckoning isn't about robots replacing doctors. It's about a system that algorithmically undervalues expertise while capitalizing on its necessity.
As AI scales, the profession faces a stark choice: reclaim clinical authority—or watch as automation, private capital, and consumer-facing models redefine it beyond recognition.
The time for action is now: for transparency, for labor protections, and for a future where radiologists are seen not as validators, but as vital stewards of modern medicine.
So what could that future look like? Here are three scenarios that may shape radiology's next decade.
Where Radiology Is Heading
Radiology doesn't implode—but it fragments. Teleradiology expands as a flexible but unstable labor model, with more physicians working as independent contractors across state lines. AI handles routine reads, and volume expectations rise. Burnout remains a risk, and the profession loses cohesion. This path may offer short-term efficiency gains but erodes long-term workforce sustainability and professional identity (NCBI).
Rather than labor organizing—an unlikely path given regulatory and professional barriers in physician specialties—a more plausible outcome is increasing professional stratification. Subspecialists and proceduralists who perform complex interventions or high-reimbursement tasks retain leverage. Meanwhile, generalists and remote readers are increasingly treated as interchangeable. Some radiologists may pivot to advisory or compliance roles focused on AI oversight or quality assurance, but most will face declining autonomy and influence (JAMA).
AI continues to integrate into radiology not as a revolution but as an extension of decades-long workflow optimization. Much like PACS, voice dictation, and automated contrast protocols, AI is folded into the radiologist's daily tasks—not as a partner, but as infrastructure. Reimbursement codes will adapt, and regulatory frameworks will likely evolve to support AI-assisted diagnostics, but the core challenge will remain: preserving physician authority in an increasingly industrialized model of care (Nature Digital Medicine).
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How AI Adoption Is Sitting With Workers
How AI Adoption Is Sitting With Workers

Time​ Magazine

time27 minutes ago

  • Time​ Magazine

How AI Adoption Is Sitting With Workers

T here's a danger to focusing primarily on CEO statements about AI adoption in the workplace, warns Brian Merchant, a journalist-in-residence at the AI Now Institute, an AI policy and research institute. 'There's a wide gulf between the prognostications of tech company CEOs and what's actually happening on the ground,' he says. Merchant in 2023 published Blood in the Machine, a book about how the historical Luddites resisted automation during the industrial revolution. In his substack newsletter by the same name, Merchant has written about how AI implementation is now reshaping work. To better understand workers' perspectives on how AI is changing jobs, we spoke with Merchant. Here are excerpts from our conversation, edited for length and clarity: There have been a lot of headlines recently about how AI adoption has led to headcount reductions. How do you define the AI jobs crisis? There is a real crisis in work right now, and AI poses a distinct kind of threat. But that threat to me, based on my understanding of technological trends in history, is less that we're looking at a widespread, mass-automation, job-wipe-out event and more at a particular set of logics that generative AI gives management and employers. There are jobs that are uniquely vulnerable. They might not be immense in number, but they're jobs that people think are pretty important—writing and artistic creation and that kind of thing. So you do have those jobs being threatened, but then we also have this crisis where AI supplies managers and bosses with this imperative where, whether or not the AI can replace somebody, it's still being pushed as a justification for doing so. We saw this a lot with DOGE and the hollowing out of the public workforce and the AI-first strategies that were touted over there. More often than facilitating outright job replacement, automation is used by bosses to break down tasks, deskill labor, or use as leverage against workers. This was true in the Luddites' time, and it's true right now. A lot of the companies that say they're 'AI-first' are merely taking the opportunity to reduce salaried headcount and replace it with cheaper, more precarious contract labor. This is what happened with Klarna, the fintech company that has famously been one of the most vocal advocates of AI anywhere. [Editor's note: In May, Klarna CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski told Bloomberg that the company was reversing its well-publicized move to replace 700 human call-center workers with AI and instead hiring humans again. 'As cost unfortunately seems to have been a too predominant evaluation factor when organizing this, what you end up having is lower quality,' Siemiatkowski said.] After all, firms still need people to ensure the AI output is up to par, edit it, or to 'duct tape it' to make sure it works well enough with existing systems—bosses just figure they can take the opportunity to call that 'unskilled' work and pay the people who are doing it less. Your project, 'AI Killed My Job,' is an ongoing, multi-part series that dives deeper into how the AI jobs crisis is impacting workers day-to-day. What themes or patterns are emerging from those stories? I invited workers who have been impacted by AI to reach out and share their stories. The project has just begun, and I've already gotten hundreds of responses at this point. I expected to see AI being used as a tool by management to try to extract more labor and more value from people, to get people to work harder, and to have it kind of deteriorate conditions rather than replace work outright. That's been born out, and that's what I've seen. The first installment that I ran was around tech workers. Some people have the assumption that the tech industry is a little bit more homogeneous in its enthusiasm for AI, but that's really not the case. A lot of the workers who have to deal with them are not happy with AI and the way that AI is being used in their companies and the impact it's having on their work. There's a few people [included in the first installment] who have lost their jobs as part of layoffs initiated by a company that has an AI-first strategy, including at CrowdStrike and Dropbox, and I'm hearing from many people who haven't quite lost their jobs yet, but are exponentially concerned that they will. But, by and large, what you're seeing now is managers using AI to justify speeding up work, trying to get employees to use it to be more productive at the expense of quality or the things that people used to enjoy about their jobs. There are people who are frustrated to see management really encouraging the use of more AI at the expense of security or product quality. There's a story from a Google worker who watched colleagues feed AI-generated code into key infrastructures, which was pretty unsettling to many. That such an important and powerful company that runs such crucial web infrastructure would allow AI-generated code to be used in their systems with relatively few safeguards was really surprising. [Editor's note: A Google spokesperson said that the company actively encourages AI use internally, with roughly 30% of the company's code now being AI generated. They cited CEO Sundar Pichai's estimate that AI has increased engineering velocity by 10% but said that engineers have rigorous code review, security, and maintenance standards.] We're also seeing it being used to displace accountability, with managers using AI as a way to deflect blame should something go wrong, or, 'It's not my fault; it's AI's fault.' Your book, Blood in the Machine, tells the story of the historical Luddites' uprising against rising automation during the industrial revolution. What can we learn from that era that's still relevant today? One lesson we can learn from the Luddites is that we should be seeking ways to make more people and stakeholders involved in the process of developing and deploying technology. The Luddites were not anti-technology. They rose up and they smashed the machine because they had no other choice. The deck was stacked against them, and a lot of them were quite literally starving. Collective bargaining was illegal for them. And, just like today, conditions were increasingly difficult as the democratic levers that people can pull to demand a seat at the table were vanishingly few. (I mean, Silicon Valley just teamed up with the GOP to try and get an outright 10-year ban passed on states' abilities to regulate AI). That leads to strife, it leads to anger, it leads to feeling like you don't have a say or any options. Now, we're looking at artists and writers and content creators and coders and you name it, watching their livelihoods becoming more precarious with worsening conditions, if not getting erased outright. As you squeeze these more and more populations of people, then it's not unthinkable that you would see what happened then happen again in some capacity. You're already seeing the roots of that with people vandalizing Waymo cars, which they see as the agents of big tech and automation. That's a reason employers might want to consider that human element rather than putting the pedal to the metal with regards to AI automation because there's a lot of fear, anxiety, and anger at the way that all of this has taken shape and it's playing out. What should employers do instead? When it comes to employers, at the end of the day, if you're shelling out for a bunch of AI, then you're either hoping that your employees will use it to be more productive for you and work harder for you, or you're hoping to get rid of employees. Ideally, the employer would say it's the former. It would trust its employees to know how best to generate more value and make them more productive. In reality, even if a company goes that far, they can still turn around and trim labor costs elsewhere and mandate workers to use AI to pick up laid-off colleagues' workloads and ratchet up productivity. So what you really need is a union contract or something codified in law that you can't just fire people and replace them with AI. You see some union contracts that include language about the ways that AI or automation can be implemented and when it can't, and what the worker has say over. Right now, that is the best means of giving people power over a technology that's going to affect their working life. The problem with that is we have such low union density in the United States that it limits who can enjoy such a benefit to those who are sort of formally organized. There are also attempts at legislation that put checks on what automation can and can't touch, when AI can be used in the hiring process or what kinds of data it can collect. Overall, there has to be a serious check on the power of Silicon Valley before we can hope to get workers' voices heard in terms of how the technology's affecting them.

2 Healthcare Stocks That Have Doubled Over the Last Year but Still Have Room to Run
2 Healthcare Stocks That Have Doubled Over the Last Year but Still Have Room to Run

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

2 Healthcare Stocks That Have Doubled Over the Last Year but Still Have Room to Run

Key Points Hims & Hers Health is unlocking new sources of growth potential, and its balance sheet is flourishing. Doximity is a prime platform for advertisers, and the profits are pouring in. 10 stocks we like better than Hims & Hers Health › It's been a wild first half of the year for stocks in 2025, but finding the right companies for your portfolio is a very personal process. You need to consider the type of stocks you want to buy, the industries and sectors you gravitate toward, the amount of capital you have to invest, and your own personal risk tolerance. If you have cash to invest in the stock market right now, and you're looking for growth stocks that could make smart additions to the basket of businesses you own, there are names to be found across a range of industries, including healthcare. Here are two healthcare stocks that have at least doubled over the past 12 months but still look poised to deliver favorable returns for shareholders in the next three to five years. 1. Hims & Hers Health Hims & Hers Health (NYSE: HIMS) has witnessed a stock run-up of more than 200% over the trailing-12-month period. In contrast, the S&P 500 is up only about 18% in that same time frame. This boom in the company's share price has occurred for a few reasons. Investors were particularly excited about the company's ability to offer affordable, compounded GLP-1 drugs for weight loss amid shortages of branded versions, and that fueled significant revenue growth and share-price appreciation. However, Hims & Hers can no longer mass-produce compounded drugs like semaglutide because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration declared the shortage resolved. While the company may still offer personalized doses where clinically applicable, its primary weight loss offerings are shifting to oral medications and liraglutide. In fact, Novo Nordisk, the maker of Wegovy (semaglutide for weight) and Ozempic (semaglutide for diabetes), ended its partnership with Hims & Hers, citing concerns over the latter company's promotion and sales of compounded semaglutide. While the company's offerings may evolve in the coming months and years, it has other sources of growth to lean on besides the weight loss segment. Hims & Hers' areas of focus include sexual health, hair loss, dermatology, mental health, and primary care. The platform also provides access to both over-the-counter and prescription treatments via online consultations with licensed healthcare professionals, and most of its revenue still comes from recurring subscriptions paid by healthcare consumers. The recent acquisition of Zava, a European digital health platform, seems to have boosted investor confidence in the future of the business outside of its ambitions in the weight loss industry. The addition of Zava to Hims & Hers' ecosystem will expand its reach into the U.K., Ireland, France, and Germany. Hims & Hers also plans to launch its platform in Canada in 2026. Revenue grew by 110% year over year in the first quarter, and the company is building upon an improving track record of profitability. Hims & Hers also delivered free cash flow of about $50 million in Q1. This business has a lot of potential. 2. Doximity Doximity (NYSE: DOCS) has seen shares pop by a bit more than 100% since this time one year ago. Doximity is known as the largest digital platform for U.S. medical professionals. It serves as a professional and social network for healthcare professionals including doctors, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, and offers a wide variety of tools for communication, news, and career management. Doximity provides a curated newsfeed with the latest medical news and research relevant to different specialties, and also offers tools for job searches, salary comparisons, and reputation management. The platform even provides telehealth solutions, enabling virtual patient visits and consultations. The platform is free for healthcare professionals to use. This free access includes Doximity Dialer, a feature that allows secure communication with patients using a customized calling tool. The platform also offers free digital fax lines and access to Doximity Scribe, an AI-powered note-taking tool for verified clinicians. So, how does Doximity make money? From advertising and selling information. Doximity's platform is a prime digital marketing and advertising tool for pharmaceutical manufacturers and healthcare systems (like hospitals). These entities pay Doximity to advertise and promote their products and services to targeted medical professionals. Health systems and medical recruiting firms also pay Doximity to access its database of medical professionals for recruitment and hiring purposes. In Doximity's fiscal 2025, which ended March 31, revenue increased 20% from the prior fiscal year to $570.4 million. The company reported net income of $223.2 million, up 51% year over year, with free cash flow spiking 50% to $266.7 million. This healthcare stock is really an advertising business at its core, and a profitable one at that. These factors could induce some investors to take another long look at this top stock and I think it has room to run. Do the experts think Hims & Hers Health is a buy right now? The Motley Fool's expert analyst team, drawing on years of investing experience and deep analysis of thousands of stocks, leverages our proprietary Moneyball AI investing database to uncover top opportunities. They've just revealed their to buy now — did Hims & Hers Health make the list? When our Stock Advisor analyst team has a stock recommendation, it can pay to listen. After all, Stock Advisor's total average return is up 1,019% vs. just 178% for the S&P — that is beating the market by 841.12%!* Imagine if you were a Stock Advisor member when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $624,823!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,064,820!* The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 29, 2025 Rachel Warren has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Doximity and Hims & Hers Health. The Motley Fool recommends Novo Nordisk. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 2 Healthcare Stocks That Have Doubled Over the Last Year but Still Have Room to Run was originally published by The Motley Fool 擷取數據時發生錯誤 登入存取你的投資組合 擷取數據時發生錯誤 擷取數據時發生錯誤 擷取數據時發生錯誤 擷取數據時發生錯誤

AI's Overlooked $97 Billion Contribution to the Economy
AI's Overlooked $97 Billion Contribution to the Economy

Wall Street Journal

time35 minutes ago

  • Wall Street Journal

AI's Overlooked $97 Billion Contribution to the Economy

The U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 3% in the second quarter, which is great news. Does that mean artificial intelligence is delivering on its long-promised benefits? No, because gross domestic product isn't the best place to look for AI's contribution. Yet the official government numbers substantially underestimate the benefits of AI. First-quarter 2025 GDP was down an annualized 0.5%. Labor productivity growth ticked up a respectable but hardly transformative 2.3% in 2024, following a few lean years of gains and losses. Is AI overhyped?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store