Search

AI holds the potential to transform healthcare, promising improvements in patient care. Yet, realizing this potential is hampered by over-reliance on limited datasets and a lack of transparency in validation processes. To overcome these obstacles, we advocate the creation of a detailed registry for AI algorithms. This registry would document the development, training, and validation of AI models, ensuring scientific integrity and transparency. Additionally, it would serve as a platform for peer review and ethical oversight. By bridging the gap between scientific validation and regulatory approval, such as by the FDA, we aim to enhance the integrity and trustworthiness of AI applications in healthcare.

Despite artificial intelligence (AI) technology progresses at unprecedented rate, our ability to translate these advancements into clinical value and adoption at the bedside remains comparatively limited. This paper reviews the current use of implementation outcomes in randomized controlled trials evaluating AI-based clinical decision support and found limited adoption. To advance trust and clinical adoption of AI, there is a need to bridge the gap between traditional quantitative metrics and implementation outcomes to better grasp the reasons behind the success or failure of AI systems and improve their translation into clinical value., Information and Communication Technology

Objective Although the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine is increasingly studied, most patients do not benefit because the majority of AI models remain in the testing and prototyping environment. The development and implementation trajectory of clinical AI models are complex and a structured overview is missing. We therefore propose a step-by-step overview to enhance clinicians' understanding and to promote quality of medical AI research. Methods We summarised key elements (such as current guidelines, challenges, regulatory documents and good practices) that are needed to develop and safely implement AI in medicine. Conclusion This overview complements other frameworks in a way that it is accessible to stakeholders without prior AI knowledge and as such provides a step-by-step approach incorporating all the key elements and current guidelines that are essential for implementation, and can thereby help to move AI from bytes to bedside.

BACKGROUND: In the DESIRE study (Discharge aftEr Surgery usIng aRtificial intElligence), we have previously developed and validated a machine learning concept in 1,677 gastrointestinal and oncology surgery patients that can predict safe hospital discharge after the second postoperative day. Despite strong model performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.88) in an academic surgical population, it remains unknown whether these findings can be translated to other hospitals and surgical populations. We therefore aimed to determine the generalizability of the previously developed machine learning concept.METHODS: We externally validated the machine learning concept in gastrointestinal and oncology surgery patients admitted to 3 nonacademic hospitals in The Netherlands between January 2017 and June 2021, who remained admitted 2 days after surgery. Primary outcome was the ability to predict hospital interventions after the second postoperative day, which were defined as unplanned reoperations, radiological interventions, and/or intravenous antibiotics administration. Four forest models were locally trained and evaluated with respect to area under the receiver operating characteristics curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value.RESULTS: All models were trained on 1,693 epsiodes, of which 731 (29.9%) required a hospital intervention and demonstrated strong performance (area under the receiver operating characteristics curve only varied 4%). The best model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.83 (95% confidence interval [0.81-0.85]), sensitivity of 77.9% (0.67-0.87), specificity of 79.2% (0.72-0.85), positive predictive value of 61.6% (0.54-0.69), and negative predictive value of 89.3% (0.85-0.93).CONCLUSION: This study showed that a previously developed machine learning concept can predict safe discharge in different surgical populations a

Purpose: Due to the increasing demand for intensive care unit (ICU) treatment, and to improve quality and efficiency of care, there is a need for adequate and efficient clinical decision-making. The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has resulted in the development of prediction models, which might aid clinical decision-making. This systematic review seeks to give a contemporary overview of the current maturity of AI in the ICU, the research methods behind these studies, and the risk of bias in these studies. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify eligible studies. Studies using AI to analyze ICU data were considered eligible. Specifically, the study design, study aim, dataset size, level of validation, level of readiness, and the outcomes of clinical trials were extracted. Risk of bias in individual studies was evaluated by the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). Results: Out of 6455 studies identified through literature search, 494 were included. The most common study design was retrospective [476 studies (96.4% of all studies)] followed by prospective observational [8 (1.6%)] and clinical [10 (2%)] trials. 378 (80.9%) retrospective studies were classified as high risk of bias. No studies were identified that reported on the outcome evaluation of an AI model integrated in routine clinical practice. Conclusion: The vast majority of developed ICU-AI models remain within the testing and prototyping environment; only a handful were actually evaluated in clinical practice. A uniform and structured approach can support the development, safe delivery, and implementation of AI to determine clinical benefit in the ICU.

Introduction In the current situation, clinical patient data are often siloed in multiple hospital information systems. Especially in the intensive care unit (ICU), large volumes of clinical data are routinely collected through continuous patient monitoring. Although these data often contain useful information for clinical decision making, they are not frequently used to improve quality of care. During, but also after, pressing times, data-driven methods can be used to mine treatment patterns from clinical data to determine the best treatment options from a hospitals own clinical data. Methods In this implementer report, we describe how we implemented a data infrastructure that enabled us to learn in real time from consecutive COVID-19 ICU admissions. In addition, we explain our step-by-step multidisciplinary approach to establish such a data infrastructure. Conclusion By sharing our steps and approach, we aim to inspire others, in and outside ICU walls, to make more efficient use of data at hand, now and in the future.