Search

Research in machine learning (ML) algorithms using natural behavior (i.e., text, audio, and video data) suggests that these techniques could contribute to personalization in psychology and psychiatry. However, a systematic review of the current state of the art is missing. Moreover, individual studies often target ML experts who may overlook potential clinical implications of their findings. In a narrative accessible to mental health professionals, we present a systematic review conducted in 5 psychology and 2 computer science databases. We included 128 studies that assessed the predictive power of ML algorithms using text, audio, and/or video data in the prediction of anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder. Most studies (n = 87) were aimed at predicting anxiety, while the remainder (n = 41) focused on posttraumatic stress disorder. They were mostly published since 2019 in computer science journals and tested algorithms using text (n = 72) as opposed to audio or video. Studies focused mainly on general populations (n = 92) and less on laboratory experiments (n = 23) or clinical populations (n = 13). Methodological quality varied, as did reported metrics of the predictive power, hampering comparison across studies. Two-thirds of studies, which focused on both disorders, reported acceptable to very good predictive power (including high-quality studies only). The results of 33 studies were uninterpretable, mainly due to missing information. Research into ML algorithms using natural behavior is in its infancy but shows potential to contribute to diagnostics of mental disorders, such as anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder, in the future if standardization of methods, reporting of results, and research in clinical populations are improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reinforcement learning (RL) holds great promise for intensive care medicine given the abundant availability of data and frequent sequential decision-making. But despite the emergence of promising algorithms, RL driven bedside clinical decision support is still far from reality. Major challenges include trust and safety. To help address these issues, we introduce cross off-policy evaluation and policy restriction and show how detailed policy analysis may increase clinical interpretability. As an example, we apply these in the setting of RL to optimise ventilator settings in intubated covid-19 patients. Methods: With data from the Dutch ICU Data Warehouse and using an exhaustive hyperparameter grid search, we identified an optimal set of Dueling Double-Deep Q Network RL models. The state space comprised ventilator, medication, and clinical data. The action space focused on positive end-expiratory pressure (peep) and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) concentration. We used gas exchange indices as interim rewards, and mortality and state duration as final rewards. We designed a novel evaluation method called cross off-policy evaluation (OPE) to assess the efficacy of models under varying weightings between the interim and terminal reward components. In addition, we implemented policy restriction to prevent potentially hazardous model actions. We introduce delta-Q to compare physician versus policy action quality and in-depth policy inspection using visualisations. Results: We created trajectories for 1118 intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and trained 69,120 models using 8 model architectures with 128 hyperparameter combinations. For each model, policy restrictions were applied. In the first evaluation step, 17,182/138,240 policies had good performance, but cross-OPE revealed suboptimal performance for 44% of those by varying the reward function used for evaluation. Clinical policy inspection facilitated assessment of action decisions for individual patients, including identification of action space regions that may benefit most from optimisation. Conclusion: Cross-OPE can serve as a robust evaluation framework for safe RL model implementation by identifying policies with good generalisability. Policy restriction helps prevent potentially unsafe model recommendations. Finally, the novel delta-Q metric can be used to operationalise RL models in clinical practice. Our findings offer a promising pathway towards application of RL in intensive care medicine and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: Reinforcement learning (RL) is a machine learning technique uniquely effective at sequential decision-making, which makes it potentially relevant to ICU treatment challenges. We set out to systematically review, assess level-of-readiness and meta-analyze the effect of RL on outcomes for critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase.com, Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection, Elsevier/SCOPUS and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore Digital Library from inception to March 25, 2022, with subsequent citation tracking. DATA EXTRACTION: Journal articles that used an RL technique in an ICU population and reported on patient health-related outcomes were included for full analysis. Conference papers were included for level-of-readiness assessment only. Descriptive statistics, characteristics of the models, outcome compared with clinician's policy and level-of-readiness were collected. RL-health risk of bias and applicability assessment was performed. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 1,033 articles were screened, of which 18 journal articles and 18 conference papers, were included. Thirty of those were prototyping or modeling articles and six were validation articles. All articles reported RL algorithms to outperform clinical decision-making by ICU professionals, but only in retrospective data. The modeling techniques for the state-space, action-space, reward function, RL model training, and evaluation varied widely. The risk of bias was high in all articles, mainly due to the evaluation procedure. CONCLUSION: In this first systematic review on the application of RL in intensive care medicine we found no studies that demonstrated improved patient outcomes from RL-based technologies. All studies reported that RL-agent policies outperformed clinician policies, but such assessments were all based on retrospective off-policy evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has recently found many applications in the healthcare domain thanks to its natural fit to clinical decision-making and ability to learn optimal decisions from observational data. A key challenge in adopting RL-based solution in clinical practice, however, is the inclusion of existing knowledge in learning a suitable solution. Existing knowledge from e.g. medical guidelines may improve the safety of solutions, produce a better balance between short- and long-term outcomes for patients and increase trust and adoption by clinicians. We present a framework for including knowledge available from medical guidelines in RL. The framework includes components for enforcing safety constraints and an approach that alters the learning signal to better balance short- and long-term outcomes based on these guidelines. We evaluate the framework by extending an existing RL-based mechanical ventilation (MV) approach with clinically established ventilation guidelines. Results from off-policy policy evaluation indicate that our approach has the potential to decrease 90-day mortality while ensuring lung protective ventilation. This framework provides an important stepping stone towards implementations of RL in clinical practice and opens up several avenues for further research. • Reinforcement learning based on observational data and existing knowledge. • Treatment advice and physiological knowledge in guidelines are injected into learner. • Ventilation case study indicates adherence to guidelines, clinician outperformance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]