-
Latest Research Trends in Fall Detection and Prevention Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Jul 2021Falls are unusual actions that cause a significant health risk among older people. The growing percentage of people of old age requires urgent development of fall... (Review)
Review
Falls are unusual actions that cause a significant health risk among older people. The growing percentage of people of old age requires urgent development of fall detection and prevention systems. The emerging technology focuses on developing such systems to improve quality of life, especially for the elderly. A fall prevention system tries to predict and reduce the risk of falls. In contrast, a fall detection system observes the fall and generates a help notification to minimize the consequences of falls. A plethora of technical and review papers exist in the literature with a primary focus on fall detection. Similarly, several studies are relatively old, with a focus on wearables only, and use statistical and threshold-based approaches with a high false alarm rate. Therefore, this paper presents the latest research trends in fall detection and prevention systems using Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. It uses recent studies and analyzes datasets, age groups, ML algorithms, sensors, and location. Additionally, it provides a detailed discussion of the current trends of fall detection and prevention systems with possible future directions. This overview can help researchers understand the current systems and propose new methodologies by improving the highlighted issues.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Aged; Algorithms; Humans; Machine Learning; Quality of Life; Seasons
PubMed: 34372371
DOI: 10.3390/s21155134 -
Journal of the American Medical... Jan 2022To determine the effects of using unstructured clinical text in machine learning (ML) for prediction, early detection, and identification of sepsis.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effects of using unstructured clinical text in machine learning (ML) for prediction, early detection, and identification of sepsis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, ACM DL, dblp, and IEEE Xplore databases were searched. Articles utilizing clinical text for ML or natural language processing (NLP) to detect, identify, recognize, diagnose, or predict the onset, development, progress, or prognosis of systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock were included. Sepsis definition, dataset, types of data, ML models, NLP techniques, and evaluation metrics were extracted.
RESULTS
The clinical text used in models include narrative notes written by nurses, physicians, and specialists in varying situations. This is often combined with common structured data such as demographics, vital signs, laboratory data, and medications. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) comparison of ML methods showed that utilizing both text and structured data predicts sepsis earlier and more accurately than structured data alone. No meta-analysis was performed because of incomparable measurements among the 9 included studies.
DISCUSSION
Studies focused on sepsis identification or early detection before onset; no studies used patient histories beyond the current episode of care to predict sepsis. Sepsis definition affects reporting methods, outcomes, and results. Many methods rely on continuous vital sign measurements in intensive care, making them not easily transferable to general ward units.
CONCLUSIONS
Approaches were heterogeneous, but studies showed that utilizing both unstructured text and structured data in ML can improve identification and early detection of sepsis.
Topics: Humans; Machine Learning; Natural Language Processing; Sepsis; Shock, Septic; Vital Signs
PubMed: 34897469
DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocab236 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Jul 2019Machine learning (ML) has become a vital part of medical imaging research. ML methods have evolved over the years from manual seeded inputs to automatic initializations....
BACKGROUND
Machine learning (ML) has become a vital part of medical imaging research. ML methods have evolved over the years from manual seeded inputs to automatic initializations. The advancements in the field of ML have led to more intelligent and self-reliant computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems, as the learning ability of ML methods has been constantly improving. More and more automated methods are emerging with deep feature learning and representations. Recent advancements of ML with deeper and extensive representation approaches, commonly known as deep learning (DL) approaches, have made a very significant impact on improving the diagnostics capabilities of the CAD systems.
OBJECTIVE
This review aimed to survey both traditional ML and DL literature with particular application for breast cancer diagnosis. The review also provided a brief insight into some well-known DL networks.
METHODS
In this paper, we present an overview of ML and DL techniques with particular application for breast cancer. Specifically, we search the PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Springer, and Web of Science databases and retrieve the studies in DL for the past 5 years that have used multiview mammogram datasets.
RESULTS
The analysis of traditional ML reveals the limited usage of the methods, whereas the DL methods have great potential for implementation in clinical analysis and improve the diagnostic capability of existing CAD systems.
CONCLUSIONS
From the literature, it can be found that heterogeneous breast densities make masses more challenging to detect and classify compared with calcifications. The traditional ML methods present confined approaches limited to either particular density type or datasets. Although the DL methods show promising improvements in breast cancer diagnosis, there are still issues of data scarcity and computational cost, which have been overcome to a significant extent by applying data augmentation and improved computational power of DL algorithms.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Deep Learning; Female; Humans; Machine Learning; Mammography
PubMed: 31350843
DOI: 10.2196/14464 -
Canadian Association of Radiologists... Nov 2019The required training sample size for a particular machine learning (ML) model applied to medical imaging data is often unknown. The purpose of this study was to provide...
PURPOSE
The required training sample size for a particular machine learning (ML) model applied to medical imaging data is often unknown. The purpose of this study was to provide a descriptive review of current sample-size determination methodologies in ML applied to medical imaging and to propose recommendations for future work in the field.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search of articles using Medline and Embase with keywords including "machine learning," "image," and "sample size." The search included articles published between 1946 and 2018. Data regarding the ML task, sample size, and train-test pipeline were collected.
RESULTS
A total of 167 articles were identified, of which 22 were included for qualitative analysis. There were only 4 studies that discussed sample-size determination methodologies, and 18 that tested the effect of sample size on model performance as part of an exploratory analysis. The observed methods could be categorized as pre hoc model-based approaches, which relied on features of the algorithm, or post hoc curve-fitting approaches requiring empirical testing to model and extrapolate algorithm performance as a function of sample size. Between studies, we observed great variability in performance testing procedures used for curve-fitting, model assessment methods, and reporting of confidence in sample sizes.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study highlights the scarcity of research in training set size determination methodologies applied to ML in medical imaging, emphasizes the need to standardize current reporting practices, and guides future work in development and streamlining of pre hoc and post hoc sample size approaches.
Topics: Biomedical Research; Diagnostic Imaging; Humans; Machine Learning; Sample Size
PubMed: 31522841
DOI: 10.1016/j.carj.2019.06.002 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2022Artificial intelligence has far surpassed previous related technologies in image recognition and is increasingly used in medical image analysis. We aimed to explore the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Artificial intelligence has far surpassed previous related technologies in image recognition and is increasingly used in medical image analysis. We aimed to explore the diagnostic accuracy of the models based on deep learning or radiomics for lung cancer staging.
METHODS
Studies were systematically reviewed using literature searches from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Wanfang Database, according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies about the diagnostic accuracy of radiomics and deep learning, including the identifications of lung cancer, tumor types, malignant lung nodules and lymph node metastase, were included. After identifying the articles, the methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 checklist. We extracted the characteristic of each study; the sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC for lung cancer diagnosis were summarized for subgroup analysis.
RESULTS
The systematic review identified 19 eligible studies, of which 14 used radiomics models and 5 used deep learning models. The pooled AUROC of 7 studies to determine whether patients had lung cancer was 0.83 (95% CI 0.78-0.88). The pooled AUROC of 9 studies to determine whether patients had NSCLC was 0.78 (95% CI 0.73-0.83). The pooled AUROC of the 6 studies that determined patients had malignant lung nodules was 0.79 (95% CI 0.77-0.82). The pooled AUROC of the other 6 studies that determined whether patients had lymph node metastases was 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.82).
CONCLUSION
The models based on deep learning or radiomics have the potential to improve diagnostic accuracy for lung cancer staging.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-3-0167/, identifier: INPLASY202230167.
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Deep Learning; Humans; Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging
PubMed: 35923964
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.938113 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2020To systematically examine the design, reporting standards, risk of bias, and claims of studies comparing the performance of diagnostic deep learning algorithms for...
OBJECTIVE
To systematically examine the design, reporting standards, risk of bias, and claims of studies comparing the performance of diagnostic deep learning algorithms for medical imaging with that of expert clinicians.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the World Health Organization trial registry from 2010 to June 2019.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Randomised trial registrations and non-randomised studies comparing the performance of a deep learning algorithm in medical imaging with a contemporary group of one or more expert clinicians. Medical imaging has seen a growing interest in deep learning research. The main distinguishing feature of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in deep learning is that when CNNs are fed with raw data, they develop their own representations needed for pattern recognition. The algorithm learns for itself the features of an image that are important for classification rather than being told by humans which features to use. The selected studies aimed to use medical imaging for predicting absolute risk of existing disease or classification into diagnostic groups (eg, disease or non-disease). For example, raw chest radiographs tagged with a label such as pneumothorax or no pneumothorax and the CNN learning which pixel patterns suggest pneumothorax.
REVIEW METHODS
Adherence to reporting standards was assessed by using CONSORT (consolidated standards of reporting trials) for randomised studies and TRIPOD (transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis) for non-randomised studies. Risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised studies and PROBAST (prediction model risk of bias assessment tool) for non-randomised studies.
RESULTS
Only 10 records were found for deep learning randomised clinical trials, two of which have been published (with low risk of bias, except for lack of blinding, and high adherence to reporting standards) and eight are ongoing. Of 81 non-randomised clinical trials identified, only nine were prospective and just six were tested in a real world clinical setting. The median number of experts in the comparator group was only four (interquartile range 2-9). Full access to all datasets and code was severely limited (unavailable in 95% and 93% of studies, respectively). The overall risk of bias was high in 58 of 81 studies and adherence to reporting standards was suboptimal (<50% adherence for 12 of 29 TRIPOD items). 61 of 81 studies stated in their abstract that performance of artificial intelligence was at least comparable to (or better than) that of clinicians. Only 31 of 81 studies (38%) stated that further prospective studies or trials were required.
CONCLUSIONS
Few prospective deep learning studies and randomised trials exist in medical imaging. Most non-randomised trials are not prospective, are at high risk of bias, and deviate from existing reporting standards. Data and code availability are lacking in most studies, and human comparator groups are often small. Future studies should diminish risk of bias, enhance real world clinical relevance, improve reporting and transparency, and appropriately temper conclusions.
STUDY REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42019123605.
Topics: Algorithms; Bias; Deep Learning; Diagnostic Imaging; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; Physicians; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design
PubMed: 32213531
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.m689 -
BMC Cancer Sep 2021Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in medical imaging analysis. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of AI models used for detection of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in medical imaging analysis. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of AI models used for detection of lymph node metastasis on pre-operative staging imaging for colorectal cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using a literature search of PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, IEEE Xplore and the Cochrane Library for studies published from January 2010 to October 2020. Studies reporting on the accuracy of radiomics models and/or deep learning for the detection of lymph node metastasis in colorectal cancer by CT/MRI were included. Conference abstracts and studies reporting accuracy of image segmentation rather than nodal classification were excluded. The quality of the studies was assessed using a modified questionnaire of the QUADAS-2 criteria. Characteristics and diagnostic measures from each study were extracted. Pooling of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated in a meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Seventeen eligible studies were identified for inclusion in the systematic review, of which 12 used radiomics models and five used deep learning models. High risk of bias was found in two studies and there was significant heterogeneity among radiomics papers (73.0%). In rectal cancer, there was a per-patient AUROC of 0.808 (0.739-0.876) and 0.917 (0.882-0.952) for radiomics and deep learning models, respectively. Both models performed better than the radiologists who had an AUROC of 0.688 (0.603 to 0.772). Similarly in colorectal cancer, radiomics models with a per-patient AUROC of 0.727 (0.633-0.821) outperformed the radiologist who had an AUROC of 0.676 (0.627-0.725).
CONCLUSION
AI models have the potential to predict lymph node metastasis more accurately in rectal and colorectal cancer, however, radiomics studies are heterogeneous and deep learning studies are scarce.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020218004 .
Topics: Artificial Intelligence; Bias; Colorectal Neoplasms; Deep Learning; Humans; Lymph Nodes; Lymphatic Metastasis; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Preoperative Care; Publication Bias; ROC Curve; Radiologists; Rectal Neoplasms; Sensitivity and Specificity; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 34565338
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08773-w -
Human Brain Mapping Jun 2021Resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) detects functional connectivity (FC) abnormalities that occur in the brains of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive...
Resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) detects functional connectivity (FC) abnormalities that occur in the brains of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). FC of the default mode network (DMN) is commonly impaired in AD and MCI. We conducted a systematic review aimed at determining the diagnostic power of rs-fMRI to identify FC abnormalities in the DMN of patients with AD or MCI compared with healthy controls (HCs) using machine learning (ML) methods. Multimodal support vector machine (SVM) algorithm was the commonest form of ML method utilized. Multiple kernel approach can be utilized to aid in the classification by incorporating various discriminating features, such as FC graphs based on "nodes" and "edges" together with structural MRI-based regional cortical thickness and gray matter volume. Other multimodal features include neuropsychiatric testing scores, DTI features, and regional cerebral blood flow. Among AD patients, the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC)/Precuneus was noted to be a highly affected hub of the DMN that demonstrated overall reduced FC. Whereas reduced DMN FC between the PCC and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) was observed in MCI patients. Evidence indicates that the nodes of the DMN can offer moderate to high diagnostic power to distinguish AD and MCI patients. Nevertheless, various concerns over the homogeneity of data based on patient selection, scanner effects, and the variable usage of classifiers and algorithms pose a challenge for ML-based image interpretation of rs-fMRI datasets to become a mainstream option for diagnosing AD and predicting the conversion of HC/MCI to AD.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Cognitive Dysfunction; Connectome; Humans; Machine Learning; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Predictive Value of Tests
PubMed: 33942449
DOI: 10.1002/hbm.25369 -
Computer Methods and Programs in... Jun 2022Deep learning has remarkably impacted several different scientific disciplines over the last few years. For example, in image processing and analysis, deep learning... (Review)
Review
Deep learning has remarkably impacted several different scientific disciplines over the last few years. For example, in image processing and analysis, deep learning algorithms were able to outperform other cutting-edge methods. Additionally, deep learning has delivered state-of-the-art results in tasks like autonomous driving, outclassing previous attempts. There are even instances where deep learning outperformed humans, for example with object recognition and gaming. Deep learning is also showing vast potential in the medical domain. With the collection of large quantities of patient records and data, and a trend towards personalized treatments, there is a great need for automated and reliable processing and analysis of health information. Patient data is not only collected in clinical centers, like hospitals and private practices, but also by mobile healthcare apps or online websites. The abundance of collected patient data and the recent growth in the deep learning field has resulted in a large increase in research efforts. In Q2/2020, the search engine PubMed returned already over 11,000 results for the search term 'deep learning', and around 90% of these publications are from the last three years. However, even though PubMed represents the largest search engine in the medical field, it does not cover all medical-related publications. Hence, a complete overview of the field of 'medical deep learning' is almost impossible to obtain and acquiring a full overview of medical sub-fields is becoming increasingly more difficult. Nevertheless, several review and survey articles about medical deep learning have been published within the last few years. They focus, in general, on specific medical scenarios, like the analysis of medical images containing specific pathologies. With these surveys as a foundation, the aim of this article is to provide the first high-level, systematic meta-review of medical deep learning surveys.
Topics: Algorithms; Deep Learning; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
PubMed: 35588660
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2022.106874 -
Current Neuropharmacology 2023Traditional medicine and biomedical sciences are reaching a turning point because of the constantly growing impact and volume of Big Data. Machine Learning (ML)...
Traditional medicine and biomedical sciences are reaching a turning point because of the constantly growing impact and volume of Big Data. Machine Learning (ML) techniques and related algorithms play a central role as diagnostic, prognostic, and decision-making tools in this field. Another promising area becoming part of everyday clinical practice is personalized therapy and pharmacogenomics. Applying ML to pharmacogenomics opens new frontiers to tailored therapeutical strategies to help clinicians choose drugs with the best response and fewer side effects, operating with genetic information and combining it with the clinical profile. This systematic review aims to draw up the state-of-the-art ML applied to pharmacogenomics in psychiatry. Our research yielded fourteen papers; most were published in the last three years. The sample comprises 9,180 patients diagnosed with mood disorders, psychoses, or autism spectrum disorders. Prediction of drug response and prediction of side effects are the most frequently considered domains with the supervised ML technique, which first requires training and then testing. The random forest is the most used algorithm; it comprises several decision trees, reduces the training set's overfitting, and makes precise predictions. ML proved effective and reliable, especially when genetic and biodemographic information were integrated into the algorithm. Even though ML and pharmacogenomics are not part of everyday clinical practice yet, they will gain a unique role in the next future in improving personalized treatments in psychiatry.
Topics: Humans; Pharmacogenetics; Precision Medicine; Machine Learning; Mental Disorders; Psychiatry
PubMed: 37559539
DOI: 10.2174/1570159X21666230808170123