-
American Journal of Translational... 2023Human society has entered the age of artificial intelligence, medical practice and medical education are undergoing profound changes. Artificial intelligence (AI) is now... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Human society has entered the age of artificial intelligence, medical practice and medical education are undergoing profound changes. Artificial intelligence (AI) is now applied in many industries, particularly in healthcare and medical education, where it deeply intersects. The purpose of this paper is to overview the current situation and problems of "AI+medicine/medical" education and to provide our own perspective on the current predicament.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and CNKI databases to assess the literature on AI+medical/medical education from 2017 to July 2022. The main inclusion criteria include literature describing the current situation or predicament of "AI+medical/medical education".
RESULTS
Studies have shown that the current application of AI in medical education is focused on clinical specialty training and continuing education, with the main application areas being radiology, diagnostics, surgery, cardiology, and dentistry. The main role is to assist physicians to improve their efficiency and accuracy. In addition, the field of combining AI with medicine/medical education is steadily expanding, and the most urgent need is for policy makers, experts in the medical field, AI and education, and experts in other fields to come together to reach consensus on ethical issues and develop regulatory standards. Our study also found that most medical students are positive about adding AI-related courses to the existing medical curriculum. Finally, the quality of research on "AI+medical/medical education" is poor.
CONCLUSION
In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, our study provides an innovative systematic review of the latest "AI+medicine/medical curriculum". Since the AI+medicine curriculum is not yet regulated, we have made some suggestions.
PubMed: 37560249
DOI: No ID Found -
European Urology Oct 2023Differences in recovery, oncological, and quality of life (QoL) outcomes between open radical cystectomy (ORC) and robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy Versus Open Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Perioperative, Oncological, and Quality of Life Outcomes Using Randomized Controlled Trials.
CONTEXT
Differences in recovery, oncological, and quality of life (QoL) outcomes between open radical cystectomy (ORC) and robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for patients with bladder cancer are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
This review aims to compare these outcomes within randomized trials of ORC and RARC in this context. The primary outcome was the rate of 90-d perioperative events. The secondary outcomes included operative, pathological, survival, and health-related QoL (HRQoL) measures.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Systematic literature searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and clinicaltrials.gov were performed up to May 31, 2022.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Eight trials, reporting 1024 participants, were included. RARC was associated with a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS; mean difference [MD] 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.39, p = 0.02) than and similar complication rates to ORC. ORC was associated with higher thromboembolic events (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% CI 1.02-3.31, p = 0.04). ORC was associated with more blood loss (MD 322 ml, 95% CI 193-450, p < 0.001) and transfusions (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.65-3.36, p < 0.001), but shorter operative time (MD 76 min, 95% CI 39-112, p < 0.001) than RARC. No differences in lymph node yield (MD 1.07, 95% CI -1.73 to 3.86, p = 0.5) or positive surgical margin rates (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54-1.67, p = 0.9) were present. RARC was associated with better physical functioning or well-being (standardized MD 0.47, 95% CI 0.29-0.65, p < 0.001) and role functioning (MD 8.8, 95% CI 2.4-15.1, p = 0.007), but no improvement in overall HRQoL. No differences in progression-free survival or overall survival were seen. Limitations may include a lack of generalization given trial patients.
CONCLUSIONS
RARC offers various perioperative benefits over ORC. It may be more suitable in patients wishing to avoid blood transfusion, those wanting a shorter LOS, or those at a high risk of thromboembolic events.
PATIENT SUMMARY
This study compares robot-assisted keyhole surgery with open surgery for bladder cancer. The robot-assisted approach offered less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and fewer blood clots. No other differences were seen.
Topics: Humans; Cystectomy; Quality of Life; Robotics; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 37169638
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.04.004 -
Advances in Therapy Aug 2023Several studies have emphasized the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and its subfields, such as machine learning (ML), as emerging and feasible approaches to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Several studies have emphasized the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and its subfields, such as machine learning (ML), as emerging and feasible approaches to optimize patient care in oncology. As a result, clinicians and decision-makers are faced with a plethora of reviews regarding the state of the art of applications of AI for head and neck cancer (HNC) management. This article provides an analysis of systematic reviews on the current status, and of the limitations of the application of AI/ML as adjunctive decision-making tools in HNC management.
METHODS
Electronic databases (PubMed, Medline via Ovid, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched from inception until November 30, 2022. The study selection, searching and screening processes, inclusion, and exclusion criteria followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A risk of bias assessment was conducted using a tailored and modified version of the Assessment of Systematic Review (AMSTAR-2) tool and quality assessment using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) guidelines.
RESULTS
Of the 137 search hits retrieved, 17 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. This analysis of systematic reviews revealed that the application of AI/ML as a decision aid in HNC management can be thematized as follows: (1) detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions within histopathologic slides; (2) prediction of the histopathologic nature of a given lesion from various sources of medical imaging; (3) prognostication; (4) extraction of pathological findings from imaging; and (5) different applications in radiation oncology. In addition, the challenges in implementation of AI/ML models for clinical evaluations include the lack of standardized methodological guidelines for the collection of clinical images, development of these models, reporting of their performance, external validation procedures, and regulatory frameworks.
CONCLUSION
At present, there is a paucity of evidence to suggest the adoption of these models in clinical practice due to the aforementioned limitations. Therefore, this manuscript highlights the need for development of standardized guidelines to facilitate the adoption and implementation of these models in the daily clinical practice. In addition, adequately powered, prospective, randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to further assess the potential of AI/ML models in real-world clinical settings for the management of HNC.
Topics: Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Machine Learning; Prospective Studies; Research Design
PubMed: 37291378
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-023-02527-9 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Dec 2023To assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) models in diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis (AA) in adult patients compared to traditional... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
To assess the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) models in diagnosing and prognosticating acute appendicitis (AA) in adult patients compared to traditional methods. AA is a common cause of emergency department visits and abdominal surgeries. It is typically diagnosed through clinical assessments, laboratory tests, and imaging studies. However, traditional diagnostic methods can be time-consuming and inaccurate. Machine learning models have shown promise in improving diagnostic accuracy and predicting outcomes.
MAIN BODY
A systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted, searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Studies were evaluated for risk of bias using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data points extracted included model type, input features, validation strategies, and key performance metrics.
RESULTS
In total, 29 studies were analyzed, out of which 21 focused on diagnosis, seven on prognosis, and one on both. Artificial neural networks (ANNs) were the most commonly employed algorithm for diagnosis. Both ANN and logistic regression were also widely used for categorizing types of AA. ANNs showed high performance in most cases, with accuracy rates often exceeding 80% and AUC values peaking at 0.985. The models also demonstrated promising results in predicting postoperative outcomes such as sepsis risk and ICU admission. Risk of bias was identified in a majority of studies, with selection bias and lack of internal validation being the most common issues.
CONCLUSION
AI algorithms demonstrate significant promise in diagnosing and prognosticating AA, often surpassing traditional methods and clinical scores such as the Alvarado scoring system in terms of speed and accuracy.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Appendicitis; Prognosis; Algorithms; Machine Learning; Acute Disease
PubMed: 38114983
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00527-2 -
Cureus Sep 2023Artificial intelligence (AI) has been cited as being helpful in the diagnosis of diseases, the prediction of prognoses, and the development of patient-specific... (Review)
Review
Artificial intelligence (AI) has been cited as being helpful in the diagnosis of diseases, the prediction of prognoses, and the development of patient-specific therapeutic strategies. AI can help dentists, in particular, when they need to make important judgments quickly. It can eliminate human mistakes in making decisions, resulting in superior and consistent medical treatment while lowering the workload on dentists. The existing studies relevant to the study and application of AI in the diagnosis of various forms of mouth ulcers are reviewed in this work. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards were followed in the preparation of the review. There were no rule violations, with the significant exception of the use of a better search method that led to more accurate findings. Using search terms mainly such as AI, oral health, oral ulcers, oral herpes simplex, oral lichen planus, pemphigus vulgaris, recurrent aphthous ulcer (RAU), oral cancer, premalignant and malignant disorders, etc., a comprehensive search was carried out in the reliable sources of literature, namely PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Ovid, Global Health, and PsycINFO. For all papers, exhaustive searches were done using inclusion criteria as well as exclusion criteria between June 28, 2018, and June 28, 2023. An AI framework for the automatic categorization of oral ulcers from oral clinical photographs was developed by the authors, and it performed satisfactorily. The newly designed AI model works better than the current convolutional neural network image categorization techniques and shows a fair level of precision in the classification of oral ulcers. However, despite being useful for identifying oral ulcers, the suggested technique needs a broader set of data for validation and training purposes before being used in clinical settings. Automated OCSCC identification using a deep learning-based technique is a quick, harmless, affordable, and practical approach to evaluating the effectiveness of cancer treatment. The categorization and identification of RAU lesions through the use of non-intrusive oral pictures using the previously developed ResNet50 and YOLOV algorithms demonstrated better accuracy as well as adequate potential for the future, which could be helpful in clinical practice. Moreover, the most reliable projections for the likelihood of the presence or absence of RAU were made by the optimized neural network. The authors also discovered variables associated with RAU that might be used as input information to build artificial neural networks that anticipate RAU.
PubMed: 37842407
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.45187 -
International Journal of Medical... Aug 2023As diagnostic and prognostic models developed by traditional statistics perform poorly in real-world, artificial intelligence (AI) and Big Data (BD) may improve the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
As diagnostic and prognostic models developed by traditional statistics perform poorly in real-world, artificial intelligence (AI) and Big Data (BD) may improve the supply chain of heart transplantation (HTx), allocation opportunities, correct treatments, and finally optimize HTx outcome. We explored available studies, and discussed opportunities and limits of medical application of AI to the field of HTx.
METHOD
A systematic overview of studies published up to December 31st, 2022, in English on peer-revied journals, have been identified through PUBMED-MEDLINE-WEB of Science, referring to HTx, AI, BD. Studies were grouped in 4 domains based on main studies' objectives and results: etiology, diagnosis, prognosis, treatment. A systematic attempt was made to evaluate studies by the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) and the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD).
RESULTS
Among the 27 publications selected, none used AI applied to BD. Of the selected studies, 4 fell in the domain of etiology, 6 in the domain of diagnosis, 3 in the domain of treatment, and 17 in that of prognosis, as AI was most frequently used for algorithmic prediction and discrimination of survival, but in retrospective cohorts and registries. AI-based algorithms appeared superior to probabilistic functions to predict patterns, but external validation was rarely employed. Indeed, based on PROBAST, selected studies showed, to some extent, significant risk of bias (especially in the domain of predictors and analysis). In addition, as example of applicability in the real-world, a free-use prediction algorithm developed through AI failed to predict 1-year mortality post-HTx in cases from our center.
CONCLUSIONS
While AI-based prognostic and diagnostic functions performed better than those developed by traditional statistics, risk of bias, lack of external validation, and relatively poor applicability, may affect AI-based tools. More unbiased research with high quality BD meant for AI, transparency and external validations, are needed to have medical AI as a systematic aid to clinical decision making in HTx.
Topics: Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Big Data; Heart Transplantation; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37285695
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105110 -
Human Reproduction Open 2023What is the present performance of artificial intelligence (AI) decision support during embryo selection compared to the standard embryo selection by embryologists?
STUDY QUESTION
What is the present performance of artificial intelligence (AI) decision support during embryo selection compared to the standard embryo selection by embryologists?
SUMMARY ANSWER
AI consistently outperformed the clinical teams in all the studies focused on embryo morphology and clinical outcome prediction during embryo selection assessment.
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY
The ART success rate is ∼30%, with a worrying trend of increasing female age correlating with considerably worse results. As such, there have been ongoing efforts to address this low success rate through the development of new technologies. With the advent of AI, there is potential for machine learning to be applied in such a manner that areas limited by human subjectivity, such as embryo selection, can be enhanced through increased objectivity. Given the potential of AI to improve IVF success rates, it remains crucial to review the performance between AI and embryologists during embryo selection.
STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION
The search was done across PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid Medline, and IEEE Xplore from 1 June 2005 up to and including 7 January 2022. Included articles were also restricted to those written in English. Search terms utilized across all databases for the study were: ('Artificial intelligence' OR 'Machine Learning' OR 'Deep learning' OR 'Neural network') AND ('IVF' OR ' fertili*' OR 'assisted reproductive techn*' OR 'embryo'), where the character '*' refers the search engine to include any auto completion of the search term.
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS
A literature search was conducted for literature relating to AI applications to IVF. Primary outcomes of interest were accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the embryo morphology grade assessments and the likelihood of clinical outcomes, such as clinical pregnancy after IVF treatments. Risk of bias was assessed using the Modified Down and Black Checklist.
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE
Twenty articles were included in this review. There was no specific embryo assessment day across the studies-Day 1 until Day 5/6 of embryo development was investigated. The types of input for training AI algorithms were images and time-lapse (10/20), clinical information (6/20), and both images and clinical information (4/20). Each AI model demonstrated promise when compared to an embryologist's visual assessment. On average, the models predicted the likelihood of successful clinical pregnancy with greater accuracy than clinical embryologists, signifying greater reliability when compared to human prediction. The AI models performed at a median accuracy of 75.5% (range 59-94%) on predicting embryo morphology grade. The correct prediction (Ground Truth) was defined through the use of embryo images according to post embryologists' assessment following local respective guidelines. Using blind test datasets, the embryologists' accuracy prediction was 65.4% (range 47-75%) with the same ground truth provided by the original local respective assessment. Similarly, AI models had a median accuracy of 77.8% (range 68-90%) in predicting clinical pregnancy through the use of patient clinical treatment information compared to 64% (range 58-76%) when performed by embryologists. When both images/time-lapse and clinical information inputs were combined, the median accuracy by the AI models was higher at 81.5% (range 67-98%), while clinical embryologists had a median accuracy of 51% (range 43-59%).
LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION
The findings of this review are based on studies that have not been prospectively evaluated in a clinical setting. Additionally, a fair comparison of all the studies were deemed unfeasible owing to the heterogeneity of the studies, development of the AI models, database employed and the study design and quality.
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS
AI provides considerable promise to the IVF field and embryo selection. However, there needs to be a shift in developers' perception of the clinical outcome from successful implantation towards ongoing pregnancy or live birth. Additionally, existing models focus on locally generated databases and many lack external validation.
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS
This study was funded by Monash Data Future Institute. All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021256333.
PubMed: 37588797
DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoad031 -
Biomedical Engineering Online Dec 2023Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown excellent diagnostic performance in detecting various complex problems related to many areas of healthcare including... (Review)
Review
Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown excellent diagnostic performance in detecting various complex problems related to many areas of healthcare including ophthalmology. AI diagnostic systems developed from fundus images have become state-of-the-art tools in diagnosing retinal conditions and glaucoma as well as other ocular diseases. However, designing and implementing AI models using large imaging data is challenging. In this study, we review different machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques applied to multiple modalities of retinal data, such as fundus images and visual fields for glaucoma detection, progression assessment, staging and so on. We summarize findings and provide several taxonomies to help the reader understand the evolution of conventional and emerging AI models in glaucoma. We discuss opportunities and challenges facing AI application in glaucoma and highlight some key themes from the existing literature that may help to explore future studies. Our goal in this systematic review is to help readers and researchers to understand critical aspects of AI related to glaucoma as well as determine the necessary steps and requirements for the successful development of AI models in glaucoma.
Topics: Humans; Artificial Intelligence; Deep Learning; Glaucoma; Machine Learning; Ophthalmology
PubMed: 38102597
DOI: 10.1186/s12938-023-01187-8 -
Cureus Sep 2023Due to the increased burden of chronic medical conditions in recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) is suggested in the medical field to optimize health care.... (Review)
Review
Due to the increased burden of chronic medical conditions in recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) is suggested in the medical field to optimize health care. Physicians could implement these automated problem-solving tools for their benefit, reducing their workload, assisting in diagnostics, and supporting clinical decision-making. These tools are being considered for future medical assistance in real life. A literature review was performed to assess the impact of AI on the patient population with chronic medical conditions, using standardized guidelines. A MeSH strategy was created, and the database was searched for appropriate studies using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The online database yielded 93 results from various databases, of which 10 moderate to high-quality studies were selected to be included in our systematic review after removing the duplicates, screening titles, and articles. Of the 10 studies, nine recommended using AI after considering the potential limitations such as privacy protection, medicolegal implications, and psychosocial aspects. Due to its non-fatigable nature, AI was found to be of immense help in image recognition. It was also found to be valuable in various disciplines related to administration, physician burden, and patient adherence. The newer technologies of Chatbots and eHealth applications are of great help when used safely and effectively after proper patient education. After a careful review conducted by our team members, it is safe to conclude that implementing AI in daily clinical practice could potentiate the cognitive ability of physicians and decrease the workload through various automated technologies such as image recognition, speech recognition, and voice recognition due to its unmatchable speed and non-fatigable nature when compared to clinicians. Despite its vast benefits to the medical field, a few limitations could hinder its effective implementation into real-life practice, which requires enormous research and strict regulations to support its role as a physician's aid. However, AI should only be used as a medical support system, in order to improve the primary outcomes such as reducing waiting time, healthcare costs, and workload. AI should not be meant to replace physicians.
PubMed: 37900468
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.46066 -
Journal of Biomedical Informatics Nov 2023Adequate methods to promptly translate digital health innovations for improved patient care are essential. Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Adequate methods to promptly translate digital health innovations for improved patient care are essential. Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) have been sources of digital innovation and hold the promise to revolutionize the way we treat, manage and diagnose patients. Understanding the benefits but also the potential adverse effects of digital health innovations, particularly when these are made available or applied on healthier segments of the population is essential. One of such adverse effects is overdiagnosis.
OBJECTIVE
to comprehensively analyze quantification strategies and data-driven definitions for overdiagnosis reported in the literature.
METHODS
we conducted a scoping systematic review of manuscripts describing quantitative methods to estimate the proportion of overdiagnosed patients.
RESULTS
we identified 46 studies that met our inclusion criteria. They covered a variety of clinical conditions, primarily breast and prostate cancer. Methods to quantify overdiagnosis included both prospective and retrospective methods including randomized clinical trials, and simulations.
CONCLUSION
a variety of methods to quantify overdiagnosis have been published, producing widely diverging results. A standard method to quantify overdiagnosis is needed to allow its mitigation during the rapidly increasing development of new digital diagnostic tools.
Topics: Male; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Artificial Intelligence; Overdiagnosis; Prospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 37769829
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104506