Search

Many U.S. institutions have adopted postsurgical opioid-prescribing guidelines to standardize prescribing practices, and yet there is inherent variability in patients' opioid consumption after surgery. The utility of these guidelines is limited by the fact that some patients' needs will inevitably exceed them, and yet there are no evidence-based tools to help providers identify these patients. In this study we aimed to maximize the value of these guidelines by training machine learning models to predict patients whose needs will be met by these smaller recommended prescriptions, and patients who may require an additional degree of personalization. The aim of the present study was to develop predictive models for determining whether a surgical patient's postdischarge opioid requirement will fall above or below common opioid prescribing guidelines. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of surgical patients at one institution from 2017 to 2018. Patients were called after discharge to collect opioid consumption data. Machine learning models were used to identify outlier opioid consumers (ie, exceeding our institutional prescribing guidelines) using diagnosis codes, medical history, in-hospital opioid use, and perioperative factors as predictors. External validation was performed on opioid consumption data collected at a second institution from 2020 to 2021, and sensitivity analysis was performed using a third institution's prescribing guidelines. The development and external validation cohorts included 1,867 and 498 patients, respectively. Age, body mass index, tobacco use, preoperative opioid exposure, and in-hospital opioid consumption were the strongest predictors of postdischarge consumption. A lasso regression model exhibited an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.74 (95% confidence interval 0.67–0.81) in predicting postdischarge opioid consumption. External validation of a limited lasso model yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.67 (0.60–0.74). Performance was preserved when evaluated on another institution's guidelines (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.76 [0.72–0.80]). Patient characteristics reliably predict postdischarge opioid consumption in relation to prescribing guidelines for both opioid-naive and exposed populations. This model may be used to help providers confidently follow prescribing guidelines for patients with typical opioid responsiveness and correctly pursue more personalized prescribing for others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Reflex testing protocols allow clinical laboratories to perform second line diagnostic tests on existing specimens based on the results of initially ordered tests. Reflex testing can support optimal clinical laboratory test ordering and diagnosis. In current clinical practice, reflex testing typically relies on simple "if-then" rules; however, this limits the opportunities for reflex testing since most test ordering decisions involve more complexity than traditional rule-based approaches would allow. Here, using the analyte ferritin as an example, we propose an alternative machine learning-based approach to "smart" reflex testing., Methods: Using deidentified patient data, we developed a machine learning model to predict whether a patient getting CBC testing will also have ferritin testing ordered. We evaluate applications of this model to reflex testing by assessing its performance in comparison to possible rule-based approaches., Results: Our underlying machine learning models performed moderately well in predicting ferritin test ordering (AUC=0.731 in reference to actual ordering) and demonstrated promising potential to underlie key clinical applications. In contrast, none of the many traditionally framed, rule-based, hypothetical reflex protocols we evaluated offered sufficient agreement with actual ordering to be clinically feasible. Using chart review, we further demonstrated that the strategic deployment of our model could avoid important ferritin test ordering errors., Conclusions: Machine learning may provide a foundation for new types of reflex testing with enhanced benefits for clinical diagnosis., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Despite recent methodology advancements in clinical natural language processing (NLP), the adoption of clinical NLP models within the translational research community remains hindered by process heterogeneity and human factor variations. Concurrently, these factors also dramatically increase the difficulty in developing NLP models in multi-site settings, which is necessary for algorithm robustness and generalizability. Here, we reported on our experience developing an NLP solution for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) signs and symptom extraction in an open NLP framework from a subset of sites participating in the National COVID Cohort (N3C). We then empirically highlight the benefits of multi-site data for both symbolic and statistical methods, as well as highlight the need for federated annotation and evaluation to resolve several pitfalls encountered in the course of these efforts., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Clinical artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML) is anticipated to offer new abilities in clinical decision support, diagnostic reasoning, precision medicine, clinical operational support, and clinical research, but careful concern is needed to ensure these technologies work effectively in the clinic. Here, we detail the clinical ML/AI design process, identifying several key questions and detailing several common forms of issues that arise with ML tools, as motivated by real-world examples, such that clinicians and researchers can better anticipate and correct for such issues in their own use of ML/AI techniques., Competing Interests: Disclosure This work is funded in part by National Institutes of Health, United States grant LM013337 and by a collaborative research agreement with IBM. The authors have no additional financial agreements to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The increasing availability of large collections of electronic health record (EHR) data and unprecedented technical advances in deep learning (DL) have sparked a surge of research interest in developing DL based clinical decision support systems for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Despite the recognition of the value of deep learning in healthcare, impediments to further adoption in real healthcare settings remain due to the black-box nature of DL. Therefore, there is an emerging need for interpretable DL, which allows end users to evaluate the model decision making to know whether to accept or reject predictions and recommendations before an action is taken. In this review, we focus on the interpretability of the DL models in healthcare. We start by introducing the methods for interpretability in depth and comprehensively as a methodological reference for future researchers or clinical practitioners in this field. Besides the methods' details, we also include a discussion of advantages and disadvantages of these methods and which scenarios each of them is suitable for, so that interested readers can know how to compare and choose among them for use. Moreover, we discuss how these methods, originally developed for solving general-domain problems, have been adapted and applied to healthcare problems and how they can help physicians better understand these data-driven technologies. Overall, we hope this survey can help researchers and practitioners in both artificial intelligence and clinical fields understand what methods we have for enhancing the interpretability of their DL models and choose the optimal one accordingly. This article is categorized under: Cancer > Computational Models., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objective: Large amounts of health data are becoming available for biomedical research. Synthesizing information across databases may capture more comprehensive pictures of patient health and enable novel research studies. When no gold standard mappings between patient records are available, researchers may probabilistically link records from separate databases and analyze the linked data. However, previous linked data inference methods are constrained to certain linkage settings and exhibit low power. Here, we present ATLAS, an automated, flexible, and robust association testing algorithm for probabilistically linked data., Materials and Methods: Missing variables are imputed at various thresholds using a weighted average method that propagates uncertainty from probabilistic linkage. Next, estimated effect sizes are obtained using a generalized linear model. ATLAS then conducts the threshold combination test by optimally combining P values obtained from data imputed at varying thresholds using Fisher's method and perturbation resampling., Results: In simulations, ATLAS controls for type I error and exhibits high power compared to previous methods. In a real-world genetic association study, meta-analysis of ATLAS-enabled analyses on a linked cohort with analyses using an existing cohort yielded additional significant associations between rheumatoid arthritis genetic risk score and laboratory biomarkers., Discussion: Weighted average imputation weathers false matches and increases contribution of true matches to mitigate linkage error-induced bias. The threshold combination test avoids arbitrarily choosing a threshold to rule a match, thus automating linked data-enabled analyses and preserving power., Conclusion: ATLAS promises to enable novel and powerful research studies using linked data to capitalize on all available data sources., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)