Search

Objectives: Traditional methods for medical device post-market surveillance often fail to accurately account for operator learning effects, leading to biased assessments of device safety. These methods struggle with non-linearity, complex learning curves, and time-varying covariates, such as physician experience. To address these limitations, we sought to develop a machine learning (ML) framework to detect and adjust for operator learning effects., Materials and Methods: A gradient-boosted decision tree ML method was used to analyze synthetic datasets that replicate the complexity of clinical scenarios involving high-risk medical devices. We designed this process to detect learning effects using a risk-adjusted cumulative sum method, quantify the excess adverse event rate attributable to operator inexperience, and adjust for these alongside patient factors in evaluating device safety signals. To maintain integrity, we employed blinding between data generation and analysis teams. Synthetic data used underlying distributions and patient feature correlations based on clinical data from the Department of Veterans Affairs between 2005 and 2012. We generated 2494 synthetic datasets with widely varying characteristics including number of patient features, operators and institutions, and the operator learning form. Each dataset contained a hypothetical study device, Device B, and a reference device, Device A. We evaluated accuracy in identifying learning effects and identifying and estimating the strength of the device safety signal. Our approach also evaluated different clinically relevant thresholds for safety signal detection., Results: Our framework accurately identified the presence or absence of learning effects in 93.6% of datasets and correctly determined device safety signals in 93.4% of cases. The estimated device odds ratios' 95% confidence intervals were accurately aligned with the specified ratios in 94.7% of datasets. In contrast, a comparative model excluding operator learning effects significantly underperformed in detecting device signals and in accuracy. Notably, our framework achieved 100% specificity for clinically relevant safety signal thresholds, although sensitivity varied with the threshold applied., Discussion: A machine learning framework, tailored for the complexities of post-market device evaluation, may provide superior performance compared to standard parametric techniques when operator learning is present., Conclusion: Demonstrating the capacity of ML to overcome complex evaluative challenges, our framework addresses the limitations of traditional statistical methods in current post-market surveillance processes. By offering a reliable means to detect and adjust for learning effects, it may significantly improve medical device safety evaluation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: As the enthusiasm for integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into clinical care grows, so has our understanding of the challenges associated with deploying impactful and sustainable clinical AI models. Complex dataset shifts resulting from evolving clinical environments strain the longevity of AI models as predictive accuracy and associated utility deteriorate over time., Objective: Responsible practice thus necessitates the lifecycle of AI models be extended to include ongoing monitoring and maintenance strategies within health system algorithmovigilance programs. We describe a framework encompassing a 360° continuum of preventive, preemptive, responsive, and reactive approaches to address model monitoring and maintenance from critically different angles., Discussion: We describe the complementary advantages and limitations of these four approaches and highlight the importance of such a coordinated strategy to help ensure the promise of clinical AI is not short-lived., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association.)

Introduction: The pitfalls of label leakage, contamination of model input features with outcome information, are well established. Unfortunately, avoiding label leakage in clinical prediction models requires more nuance than the common advice of applying "no time machine rule.", Framework: We provide a framework for contemplating whether and when model features pose leakage concerns by considering the cadence, perspective, and applicability of predictions. To ground these concepts, we use real-world clinical models to highlight examples of appropriate and inappropriate label leakage in practice., Recommendations: Finally, we provide recommendations to support clinical and technical stakeholders as they evaluate the leakage tradeoffs associated with model design, development, and implementation decisions. By providing common language and dimensions to consider when designing models, we hope the clinical prediction community will be better prepared to develop statistically valid and clinically useful machine learning models., (© 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.)

Objective: Clinical prediction models require updating as performance deteriorates over time. We developed a testing procedure to select updating methods that minimizes overfitting, incorporates uncertainty associated with updating sample sizes, and is applicable to both parametric and nonparametric models., Materials and Methods: We describe a procedure to select an updating method for dichotomous outcome models by balancing simplicity against accuracy. We illustrate the test's properties on simulated scenarios of population shift and 2 models based on Department of Veterans Affairs inpatient admissions., Results: In simulations, the test generally recommended no update under no population shift, no update or modest recalibration under case mix shifts, intercept correction under changing outcome rates, and refitting under shifted predictor-outcome associations. The recommended updates provided superior or similar calibration to that achieved with more complex updating. In the case study, however, small update sets lead the test to recommend simpler updates than may have been ideal based on subsequent performance., Discussion: Our test's recommendations highlighted the benefits of simple updating as opposed to systematic refitting in response to performance drift. The complexity of recommended updating methods reflected sample size and magnitude of performance drift, as anticipated. The case study highlights the conservative nature of our test., Conclusions: This new test supports data-driven updating of models developed with both biostatistical and machine learning approaches, promoting the transportability and maintenance of a wide array of clinical prediction models and, in turn, a variety of applications relying on modern prediction tools., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: Predictive analytics create opportunities to incorporate personalized risk estimates into clinical decision support. Models must be well calibrated to support decision-making, yet calibration deteriorates over time. This study explored the influence of modeling methods on performance drift and connected observed drift with data shifts in the patient population., Materials and Methods: Using 2003 admissions to Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals nationwide, we developed 7 parallel models for hospital-acquired acute kidney injury using common regression and machine learning methods, validating each over 9 subsequent years., Results: Discrimination was maintained for all models. Calibration declined as all models increasingly overpredicted risk. However, the random forest and neural network models maintained calibration across ranges of probability, capturing more admissions than did the regression models. The magnitude of overprediction increased over time for the regression models while remaining stable and small for the machine learning models. Changes in the rate of acute kidney injury were strongly linked to increasing overprediction, while changes in predictor-outcome associations corresponded with diverging patterns of calibration drift across methods., Conclusions: Efficient and effective updating protocols will be essential for maintaining accuracy of, user confidence in, and safety of personalized risk predictions to support decision-making. Model updating protocols should be tailored to account for variations in calibration drift across methods and respond to periods of rapid performance drift rather than be limited to regularly scheduled annual or biannual intervals., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com)