-
The Lancet. Digital Health Jun 2022Skin cancers occur commonly worldwide. The prognosis and disease burden are highly dependent on the cancer type and disease stage at diagnosis. We systematically... (Review)
Review
Skin cancers occur commonly worldwide. The prognosis and disease burden are highly dependent on the cancer type and disease stage at diagnosis. We systematically reviewed studies on artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) algorithms that aim to facilitate the early diagnosis of skin cancers, focusing on their application in primary and community care settings. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science (from Jan 1, 2000, to Aug 9, 2021) for all studies providing evidence on applying AI/ML algorithms to the early diagnosis of skin cancer, including all study designs and languages. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of the algorithms for skin cancers. The secondary outcomes included an overview of AI/ML methods, evaluation approaches, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability to patients and clinicians. We identified 14 224 studies. Only two studies used data from clinical settings with a low prevalence of skin cancers. We reported data from all 272 studies that could be relevant in primary care. The primary outcomes showed reasonable mean diagnostic accuracy for melanoma (89·5% [range 59·7-100%]), squamous cell carcinoma (85·3% [71·0-97·8%]), and basal cell carcinoma (87·6% [70·0-99·7%]). The secondary outcomes showed a heterogeneity of AI/ML methods and study designs, with high amounts of incomplete reporting (eg, patient demographics and methods of data collection). Few studies used data on populations with a low prevalence of skin cancers to train and test their algorithms; therefore, the widespread adoption into community and primary care practice cannot currently be recommended until efficacy in these populations is shown. We did not identify any health economic, patient, or clinician acceptability data for any of the included studies. We propose a methodological checklist for use in the development of new AI/ML algorithms to detect skin cancer, to facilitate their design, evaluation, and implementation.
Topics: Algorithms; Artificial Intelligence; Early Detection of Cancer; Humans; Machine Learning; Primary Health Care; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 35623799
DOI: 10.1016/S2589-7500(22)00023-1 -
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2021(1) Background: The rapid pace of digital development in everyday life is also reflected in dentistry, including the emergence of the first systems based on artificial... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: The rapid pace of digital development in everyday life is also reflected in dentistry, including the emergence of the first systems based on artificial intelligence (AI). This systematic review focused on the recent scientific literature and provides an overview of the application of AI in the dental discipline of prosthodontics. (2) Method: According to a modified PICO-strategy, an electronic (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL) and manual search up to 30 June 2021 was carried out for the literature published in the last five years reporting the use of AI in the field of prosthodontics. (3) Results: 560 titles were screened, of which 30 abstracts and 16 full texts were selected for further review. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Most of the identified studies reported the training and application of an AI system ( = 6) or explored the function of an intrinsic AI system in a CAD software ( = 1). (4) Conclusions: While the number of included studies reporting the use of AI was relatively low, the summary of the obtained findings by the included studies represents the latest AI developments in prosthodontics demonstrating its application for automated diagnostics, as a predictive measure, and as a classification or identification tool. In the future, AI technologies will likely be used for collecting, processing, and organizing patient-related datasets to provide patient-centered, individualized dental treatment.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Delivery of Health Care; Humans; Prosthodontics
PubMed: 34640948
DOI: 10.3390/s21196628 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research May 2021Machine learning systems are part of the field of artificial intelligence that automatically learn models from data to make better decisions. Natural language processing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Machine learning systems are part of the field of artificial intelligence that automatically learn models from data to make better decisions. Natural language processing (NLP), by using corpora and learning approaches, provides good performance in statistical tasks, such as text classification or sentiment mining.
OBJECTIVE
The primary aim of this systematic review was to summarize and characterize, in methodological and technical terms, studies that used machine learning and NLP techniques for mental health. The secondary aim was to consider the potential use of these methods in mental health clinical practice.
METHODS
This systematic review follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis) guidelines and is registered with PROSPERO (Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; number CRD42019107376). The search was conducted using 4 medical databases (PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and PsycINFO) with the following keywords: machine learning, data mining, psychiatry, mental health, and mental disorder. The exclusion criteria were as follows: languages other than English, anonymization process, case studies, conference papers, and reviews. No limitations on publication dates were imposed.
RESULTS
A total of 327 articles were identified, of which 269 (82.3%) were excluded and 58 (17.7%) were included in the review. The results were organized through a qualitative perspective. Although studies had heterogeneous topics and methods, some themes emerged. Population studies could be grouped into 3 categories: patients included in medical databases, patients who came to the emergency room, and social media users. The main objectives were to extract symptoms, classify severity of illness, compare therapy effectiveness, provide psychopathological clues, and challenge the current nosography. Medical records and social media were the 2 major data sources. With regard to the methods used, preprocessing used the standard methods of NLP and unique identifier extraction dedicated to medical texts. Efficient classifiers were preferred rather than transparent functioning classifiers. Python was the most frequently used platform.
CONCLUSIONS
Machine learning and NLP models have been highly topical issues in medicine in recent years and may be considered a new paradigm in medical research. However, these processes tend to confirm clinical hypotheses rather than developing entirely new information, and only one major category of the population (ie, social media users) is an imprecise cohort. Moreover, some language-specific features can improve the performance of NLP methods, and their extension to other languages should be more closely investigated. However, machine learning and NLP techniques provide useful information from unexplored data (ie, patients' daily habits that are usually inaccessible to care providers). Before considering It as an additional tool of mental health care, ethical issues remain and should be discussed in a timely manner. Machine learning and NLP methods may offer multiple perspectives in mental health research but should also be considered as tools to support clinical practice.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Data Management; Humans; Machine Learning; Mental Health; Natural Language Processing
PubMed: 33944788
DOI: 10.2196/15708 -
Using artificial intelligence methods for systematic review in health sciences: A systematic review.Research Synthesis Methods May 2022The exponential increase in published articles makes a thorough and expedient review of literature increasingly challenging. This review delineated automated tools and...
The exponential increase in published articles makes a thorough and expedient review of literature increasingly challenging. This review delineated automated tools and platforms that employ artificial intelligence (AI) approaches and evaluated the reported benefits and challenges in using such methods. A search was conducted in 4 databases (Medline, Embase, CDSR, and Epistemonikos) up to April 2021 for systematic reviews and other related reviews implementing AI methods. To be included, the review must use any form of AI method, including machine learning, deep learning, neural network, or any other applications used to enable the full or semi-autonomous performance of one or more stages in the development of evidence synthesis. Twelve reviews were included, using nine different tools to implement 15 different AI methods. Eleven methods were used in the screening stages of the review (73%). The rest were divided: two in data extraction (13%) and two in risk of bias assessment (13%). The ambiguous benefits of the data extractions, combined with the reported advantages from 10 reviews, indicating that AI platforms have taken hold with varying success in evidence synthesis. However, the results are qualified by the reliance on the self-reporting of the review authors. Extensive human validation still appears required at this stage in implementing AI methods, though further evaluation is required to define the overall contribution of such platforms in enhancing efficiency and quality in evidence synthesis.
Topics: Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Machine Learning; Medicine; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 35174972
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1553 -
International Journal of Medical... Apr 2023Artificial Intelligence (AI) offers potential opportunities to optimize clinical pharmacy services in community or hospital settings. The objective of this systematic... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Artificial Intelligence (AI) offers potential opportunities to optimize clinical pharmacy services in community or hospital settings. The objective of this systematic literature review was to identify and analyse quantitative studies using or integrating AI for clinical pharmacy services.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using PubMed/Medline and Web of Science databases, including all articles published from 2000 to December 2021. Included studies had to involve pharmacists in the development or use of AI-powered apps and tools..
RESULTS
19 studies using AI for clinical pharmacy services were included in this review. 12 out of 19 articles (63.1%) were published in 2020 or 2021. Various methodologies of AI were used, mainly machine learning techniques and subsets (natural language processing and deep learning). The datasets used to train the models were mainly extracted from electronic medical records (6 studies, 32%). Among clinical pharmacy services, medication order review was the service most targeted by AI-powered apps and tools (9 studies), followed by health product dispensing (4 studies), pharmaceutical interviews and therapeutic education (2 studies). The development of these tools mainly involved hospital pharmacists (12/19 studies).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The development of AI-powered apps and tools for clinical pharmacy services is just beginning. Pharmacists need to keep abreast of these developments in order to position themselves optimally while maintaining their human relationships with healthcare teams and patients. Significant efforts have to be made, in collaboration with data scientists, to better assess whether AI-powered apps and tools bring value to clinical pharmacy services in real practice.
Topics: Humans; Pharmacy Service, Hospital; Artificial Intelligence; Pharmacists; Hospitals; Physicians; Community Pharmacy Services
PubMed: 36724730
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2022.104983 -
Pharmaceutical Medicine Oct 2022Artificial intelligence through machine learning uses algorithms and prior learnings to make predictions. Recently, there has been interest to include more artificial...
INTRODUCTION
Artificial intelligence through machine learning uses algorithms and prior learnings to make predictions. Recently, there has been interest to include more artificial intelligence in pharmacovigilance of products already in the market and pharmaceuticals in development.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to identify and describe the uses of artificial intelligence in pharmacovigilance through a systematic literature review.
METHODS
Embase and MEDLINE database searches were conducted for articles published from January 1, 2015 to July 9, 2021 using search terms such as 'pharmacovigilance,' 'patient safety,' 'artificial intelligence,' and 'machine learning' in the title or abstract. Scientific articles that contained information on the use of artificial intelligence in all modalities of patient safety or pharmacovigilance were reviewed and synthesized using a pre-specified data extraction template. Articles with incomplete information and letters to editor, notes, and commentaries were excluded.
RESULTS
Sixty-six articles were identified for evaluation. Most relevant articles on artificial intelligence focused on machine learning, and it was used in patient safety in the identification of adverse drug events (ADEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) (57.6%), processing safety reports (21.2%), extraction of drug-drug interactions (7.6%), identification of populations at high risk for drug toxicity or guidance for personalized care (7.6%), prediction of side effects (3.0%), simulation of clinical trials (1.5%), and integration of prediction uncertainties into diagnostic classifiers to increase patient safety (1.5%). Artificial intelligence has been used to identify safety signals through automated processes and training with machine learning models; however, the findings may not be generalizable given that there were different types of data included in each source.
CONCLUSION
Artificial intelligence allows for the processing and analysis of large amounts of data and can be applied to various disease states. The automation and machine learning models can optimize pharmacovigilance processes and provide a more efficient way to analyze information relevant to safety, although more research is needed to identify if this optimization has an impact on the quality of safety analyses. It is expected that its use will increase in the near future, particularly with its role in the prediction of side effects and ADRs.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Machine Learning; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Pharmacovigilance
PubMed: 35904529
DOI: 10.1007/s40290-022-00441-z -
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Oct 2021Over the past years, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine has increased rapidly, especially in diagnostics, and in the near future, the role of AI... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Over the past years, the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine has increased rapidly, especially in diagnostics, and in the near future, the role of AI in medicine will become progressively more important. In this study, we elucidated the state of AI research on gynecologic cancers.
METHODS
A search was conducted in three databases-PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus-for research papers dated between January 2010 and December 2020. As keywords, we used "artificial intelligence," "deep learning," "machine learning," and "neural network," combined with "cervical cancer," "endometrial cancer," "uterine cancer," and "ovarian cancer." We excluded genomic and molecular research, as well as automated pap-smear diagnoses and digital colposcopy.
RESULTS
Of 1632 articles, 71 were eligible, including 34 on cervical cancer, 13 on endometrial cancer, three on uterine sarcoma, and 21 on ovarian cancer. A total of 35 studies (49%) used imaging data and 36 studies (51%) used value-based data as the input data. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), ultrasound, cytology, and hysteroscopy data were used as imaging data, and the patients' backgrounds, blood examinations, tumor markers, and indices in pathological examination were used as value-based data. The targets of prediction were definitive diagnosis and prognostic outcome, including overall survival and lymph node metastasis. The size of the dataset was relatively small because 64 studies (90%) included less than 1000 cases, and the median size was 214 cases. The models were evaluated by accuracy scores, area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), and sensitivity/specificity. Owing to the heterogeneity, a quantitative synthesis was not appropriate in this review.
CONCLUSIONS
In gynecologic oncology, more studies have been conducted on cervical cancer than on ovarian and endometrial cancers. Prognoses were mainly used in the study of cervical cancer, whereas diagnoses were primarily used for studying ovarian cancer. The proficiency of the study design for endometrial cancer and uterine sarcoma was unclear because of the small number of studies conducted. The small size of the dataset and the lack of a dataset for external validation were indicated as the challenges of the studies.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Humans; Lymphatic Metastasis; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 34629152
DOI: 10.1016/j.artmed.2021.102164 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Apr 2021Artificial intelligence (AI) applications are growing at an unprecedented pace in health care, including disease diagnosis, triage or screening, risk analysis, surgical... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Artificial intelligence (AI) applications are growing at an unprecedented pace in health care, including disease diagnosis, triage or screening, risk analysis, surgical operations, and so forth. Despite a great deal of research in the development and validation of health care AI, only few applications have been actually implemented at the frontlines of clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to systematically review AI applications that have been implemented in real-life clinical practice.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL to identify relevant articles published between January 2010 and May 2020. We also hand searched premier computer science journals and conferences as well as registered clinical trials. Studies were included if they reported AI applications that had been implemented in real-world clinical settings.
RESULTS
We identified 51 relevant studies that reported the implementation and evaluation of AI applications in clinical practice, of which 13 adopted a randomized controlled trial design and eight adopted an experimental design. The AI applications targeted various clinical tasks, such as screening or triage (n=16), disease diagnosis (n=16), risk analysis (n=14), and treatment (n=7). The most commonly addressed diseases and conditions were sepsis (n=6), breast cancer (n=5), diabetic retinopathy (n=4), and polyp and adenoma (n=4). Regarding the evaluation outcomes, we found that 26 studies examined the performance of AI applications in clinical settings, 33 studies examined the effect of AI applications on clinician outcomes, 14 studies examined the effect on patient outcomes, and one study examined the economic impact associated with AI implementation.
CONCLUSIONS
This review indicates that research on the clinical implementation of AI applications is still at an early stage despite the great potential. More research needs to assess the benefits and challenges associated with clinical AI applications through a more rigorous methodology.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Sepsis
PubMed: 33885365
DOI: 10.2196/25759 -
Journal of Dental Research Dec 2021Dentistry increasingly integrates artificial intelligence (AI) to help improve the current state of clinical dental practice. However, this revolutionary technological... (Review)
Review
Dentistry increasingly integrates artificial intelligence (AI) to help improve the current state of clinical dental practice. However, this revolutionary technological field raises various complex ethical challenges. The objective of this systematic scoping review is to document the current uses of AI in dentistry and the ethical concerns or challenges they imply. Three health care databases (MEDLINE [PubMed], SciVerse Scopus, and Cochrane Library) and 2 computer science databases (ArXiv, IEEE Xplore) were searched. After identifying 1,553 records, the documents were filtered, and a full-text screening was performed. In total, 178 studies were retained and analyzed by 8 researchers specialized in dentistry, AI, and ethics. The team used Covidence for data extraction and Dedoose for the identification of ethics-related information. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Among the included studies, 130 (73.0%) studies were published after 2016, and 93 (52.2%) were published in journals specialized in computer sciences. The technologies used were neural learning techniques for 75 (42.1%), traditional learning techniques for 76 (42.7%), or a combination of several technologies for 20 (11.2%). Overall, 7 countries contributed to 109 (61.2%) studies. A total of 53 different applications of AI in dentistry were identified, involving most dental specialties. The use of initial data sets for internal validation was reported in 152 (85.4%) studies. Forty-five ethical issues (related to the use AI in dentistry) were reported in 22 (12.4%) studies around 6 principles: prudence (10 times), equity (8), privacy (8), responsibility (6), democratic participation (4), and solidarity (4). The ratio of studies mentioning AI-related ethical issues has remained similar in the past years, showing that there is no increasing interest in the field of dentistry on this topic. This study confirms the growing presence of AI in dentistry and highlights a current lack of information on the ethical challenges surrounding its use. In addition, the scarcity of studies sharing their code could prevent future replications. The authors formulate recommendations to contribute to a more responsible use of AI technologies in dentistry.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Delivery of Health Care; Dentistry; Forecasting
PubMed: 34060359
DOI: 10.1177/00220345211013808 -
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research Dec 2021This scoping review aims to determine the applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) that are extensively employed in the field of Orthodontics, to evaluate its... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This scoping review aims to determine the applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) that are extensively employed in the field of Orthodontics, to evaluate its benefits, and to discuss its potential implications in this speciality. Recent decades have witnessed enormous changes in our profession. The arrival of new and more aesthetic options in orthodontic treatment, the transition to a fully digital workflow, the emergence of temporary anchorage devices and new imaging methods all provide both patients and professionals with a new focus in orthodontic care.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The electronic literature search was performed through MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane and IEEE Xplore databases with a 11-year time restriction: January 2010 till March 2021. No additional manual searches were performed.
RESULTS
The electronic literature search initially returned 311 records, and 115 after removing duplicate references. Finally, the application of the inclusion criteria resulted in 17 eligible publications in the qualitative synthesis review.
CONCLUSION
The analysed studies demonstrated that Convolution Neural Networks can be used for the automatic detection of anatomical reference points on radiological images. In the growth and development research area, the Cervical Vertebral Maturation stage can be determined using an Artificial Neural Network model and obtain the same results as expert human observers. AI technology can also improve the diagnostic accuracy for orthodontic treatments, thereby helping the orthodontist work more accurately and efficiently.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Orthodontics
PubMed: 34270881
DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12517