Search

Digital cytology and artificial intelligence (AI) are gaining greater adoption in the cytology laboratory. However, peer-reviewed real-world data and literature are lacking in regard to the current clinical landscape. The American Society of Cytopathology in conjunction with the International Academy of Cytology and the Digital Pathology Association established a special task force comprising 20 members with expertise and/or interest in digital cytology. The aim of the group was to investigate the feasibility of incorporating digital cytology, specifically cytology whole slide scanning and AI applications, into the workflow of the laboratory. In turn, the impact on cytopathologists, cytologists (cytotechnologists), and cytology departments were also assessed. The task force reviewed existing literature on digital cytology, conducted a worldwide survey, and held a virtual roundtable discussion on digital cytology and AI with multiple industry corporate representatives. This white paper, presented in 2 parts, summarizes the current state of digital cytology and AI practice in global cytology practice. Part 1 of the white paper is presented as a separate paper which details a review and best practice recommendations for incorporating digital cytology into practice. Part 2 of the white paper presented here provides a comprehensive review of AI in cytology practice along with best practice recommendations and legal considerations. Additionally, the cytology global survey results highlighting current AI practices by various laboratories, as well as current attitudes, are reported., (Copyright © 2023 American Society of Cytopathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Digital cytology and artificial intelligence (AI) are gaining greater adoption in the cytopathology laboratory. However, peer-reviewed real-world data and literature are lacking regarding the current clinical landscape. The American Society of Cytopathology in conjunction with the International Academy of Cytology and the Digital Pathology Association established a special task force comprising 20 members with expertise and/or interest in digital cytology. The aim of the group was to investigate the feasibility of incorporating digital cytology, specifically cytology whole slide scanning and AI applications, into the workflow of the laboratory. In turn, the impact on cytopathologists, cytologists (cytotechnologists), and cytology departments were also assessed. The task force reviewed existing literature on digital cytology, conducted a worldwide survey, and held a virtual roundtable discussion on digital cytology and AI with multiple industry corporate representatives. This white paper, presented in 2 parts, summarizes the current state of digital cytology and AI practice in global cytology practice. Part 1 of the white paper presented herein is a review and offers best practice recommendations for incorporating digital cytology into practice. Part 2 of the white paper provides a comprehensive review of AI in cytology practice along with best practice recommendations and legal considerations. Additionally, the results of a global survey regarding digital cytology are highlighted., (Copyright © 2023 American Society of Cytopathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Artificial Intelligence in higher education (AIED) is becoming a more important research area with increasing developments and application of AI within the wider society. However, as yet AI based tools have not been widely adopted in higher education. As a result there is a lack of sound evidence available on the pedagogical impact of AI for learning and teaching. This conceptual paper thus seeks to bridge the gap and addresses the following question: is artificial intelligence really the new big thing that will revolutionise learning and teaching in higher education? Adopting the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) as the theoretical foundations, we argue that Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies, at least in their current state of development, do not afford any real new advances for pedagogy in higher education. This is mainly because there does not seem to be valid evidence as to how the use of AI technologies and applications has helped students improve learning, and/or helped tutors make effective pedagogical changes. In addition, the pedagogical affordances of AI have not yet been clearly defined. The challenges that the higher education sector is currently experiencing relating to AI adoption are discussed at three hierarchical levels, namely national, institutional and personal levels. The paper ends with recommendations with regard to accelerating AI use in universities. This includes developing dedicated AI adoption strategies at the institutional level, updating the existing technology infrastructure and upskilling academic tutors for AI.

Aim: The aim of this study is to present the possibilities of nurse education in the use of the Chat Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) tool to support the documentation process., Background: The success of the nursing process is based on the accuracy of nursing diagnoses, which also determine nursing interventions and nursing outcomes. Educating nurses in the use of artificial intelligence in the nursing process can significantly reduce the time nurses spend on documentation., Design: Discussion paper., Methods: We used a case study from Train4Health in the field of preventive care to demonstrate the potential of using Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) to educate nurses in documenting the nursing process using generative artificial intelligence. Based on the case study, we entered a description of the patient's condition into Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) and asked questions about nursing diagnoses, nursing interventions and nursing outcomes. We further synthesized these results., Results: In the process of educating nurses about the nursing process and nursing diagnosis, Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) can present potential patient problems to nurses and guide them through the process from taking a medical history, setting nursing diagnoses and planning goals and interventions. Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) returned appropriate nursing diagnoses, but these were not in line with the North American Nursing Diagnosis Association - International (NANDA-I) classification as requested. Of all the nursing diagnoses provided, only one was consistent with the most recent version of the North American Nursing Diagnosis Association - International (NANDA-I). Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) is still not specific enough for nursing diagnoses, resulting in incorrect answers in several cases., Conclusions: Using Generative Pre-training Transformer (ChatGPT) to educate nurses and support the documentation process is time-efficient, but it still requires a certain level of human critical-thinking and fact-checking., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The systematic review of clinical research papers is a labor-intensive and time-consuming process that often involves the screening of thousands of titles and abstracts. The accuracy and efficiency of this process are critical for the quality of the review and subsequent health care decisions. Traditional methods rely heavily on human reviewers, often requiring a significant investment of time and resources., Objective: This study aims to assess the performance of the OpenAI generative pretrained transformer (GPT) and GPT-4 application programming interfaces (APIs) in accurately and efficiently identifying relevant titles and abstracts from real-world clinical review data sets and comparing their performance against ground truth labeling by 2 independent human reviewers., Methods: We introduce a novel workflow using the Chat GPT and GPT-4 APIs for screening titles and abstracts in clinical reviews. A Python script was created to make calls to the API with the screening criteria in natural language and a corpus of title and abstract data sets filtered by a minimum of 2 human reviewers. We compared the performance of our model against human-reviewed papers across 6 review papers, screening over 24,000 titles and abstracts., Results: Our results show an accuracy of 0.91, a macro F 1 -score of 0.60, a sensitivity of excluded papers of 0.91, and a sensitivity of included papers of 0.76. The interrater variability between 2 independent human screeners was κ=0.46, and the prevalence and bias-adjusted κ between our proposed methods and the consensus-based human decisions was κ=0.96. On a randomly selected subset of papers, the GPT models demonstrated the ability to provide reasoning for their decisions and corrected their initial decisions upon being asked to explain their reasoning for incorrect classifications., Conclusions: Large language models have the potential to streamline the clinical review process, save valuable time and effort for researchers, and contribute to the overall quality of clinical reviews. By prioritizing the workflow and acting as an aid rather than a replacement for researchers and reviewers, models such as GPT-4 can enhance efficiency and lead to more accurate and reliable conclusions in medical research., (©Eddie Guo, Mehul Gupta, Jiawen Deng, Ye-Jean Park, Michael Paget, Christopher Naugler. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 12.01.2024.)

Background: In the rapid evolving landscape of artificial intelligence (AI), scientific publishing is experiencing significant transformations. AI tools, while offering unparalleled efficiencies in paper drafting and peer review, also introduce notable ethical concerns., Content: This study delineates AI's dual role in scientific publishing: as a co-creator in the writing and review of scientific papers and as an ethical challenge. We first explore the potential of AI as an enhancer of efficiency, efficacy, and quality in creating scientific papers. A critical assessment follows, evaluating the risks vs. rewards for researchers, especially those early in their careers, emphasizing the need to maintain a balance between AI's capabilities and fostering independent reasoning and creativity. Subsequently, we delve into the ethical dilemmas of AI's involvement, particularly concerning originality, plagiarism, and preserving the genuine essence of scientific discourse. The evolving dynamics further highlight an overlooked aspect: the inadequate recognition of human reviewers in the academic community. With the increasing volume of scientific literature, tangible metrics and incentives for reviewers are proposed as essential to ensure a balanced academic environment., Summary: AI's incorporation in scientific publishing is promising yet comes with significant ethical and operational challenges. The role of human reviewers is accentuated, ensuring authenticity in an AI-influenced environment., Outlook: As the scientific community treads the path of AI integration, a balanced symbiosis between AI's efficiency and human discernment is pivotal. Emphasizing human expertise, while exploit artificial intelligence responsibly, will determine the trajectory of an ethically sound and efficient AI-augmented future in scientific publishing., (© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.)