The 7-stranded structure of relaxed scallop muscle myosin filaments: support for a common head configuration in myosin-regulated muscles.

Hind A. Al-Khayat,E. Morris,J. Squire

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsb.2009.02.006

IF: 3.234

2009-05-01

Journal of Structural Biology

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Literature Review and Content Analysis of Frameworks

Norah L Crossnohere,Mohamed Elsaid,Jonathan Paskett,Seuli Bose-Brill,John F P Bridges

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/36823

IF: 7.076

2022-08-26

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding in medicine despite a lack of consensus on its application and evaluation. Objective: We sought to identify current frameworks guiding the application and evaluation of AI for predictive analytics in medicine and to describe the content of these frameworks. We also assessed what stages along the AI translational spectrum (ie, AI development, reporting, evaluation, implementation, and surveillance) the content of each framework has been discussed. Methods: We performed a literature review of frameworks regarding the oversight of AI in medicine. The search included key topics such as "artificial intelligence," "machine learning," "guidance as topic," and "translational science," and spanned the time period 2014-2022. Documents were included if they provided generalizable guidance regarding the use or evaluation of AI in medicine. Included frameworks are summarized descriptively and were subjected to content analysis. A novel evaluation matrix was developed and applied to appraise the frameworks' coverage of content areas across translational stages. Results: Fourteen frameworks are featured in the review, including six frameworks that provide descriptive guidance and eight that provide reporting checklists for medical applications of AI. Content analysis revealed five considerations related to the oversight of AI in medicine across frameworks: transparency, reproducibility, ethics, effectiveness, and engagement. All frameworks include discussions regarding transparency, reproducibility, ethics, and effectiveness, while only half of the frameworks discuss engagement. The evaluation matrix revealed that frameworks were most likely to report AI considerations for the translational stage of development and were least likely to report considerations for the translational stage of surveillance. Conclusions: Existing frameworks for the application and evaluation of AI in medicine notably offer less input on the role of engagement in oversight and regarding the translational stage of surveillance. Identifying and optimizing strategies for engagement are essential to ensure that AI can meaningfully benefit patients and other end users.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Evaluating Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Settings-Let Us Not Reinvent the Wheel

Kathrin Cresswell,Nicolette de Keizer,Farah Magrabi,Robin Williams,Michael Rigby,Mirela Prgomet,Polina Kukhareva,Zoie Shui-Yee Wong,Philip Scott,Catherine K Craven,Andrew Georgiou,Stephanie Medlock,Jytte Brender McNair,Elske Ammenwerth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/46407

2024-08-07

Abstract:Given the requirement to minimize the risks and maximize the benefits of technology applications in health care provision, there is an urgent need to incorporate theory-informed health IT (HIT) evaluation frameworks into existing and emerging guidelines for the evaluation of artificial intelligence (AI). Such frameworks can help developers, implementers, and strategic decision makers to build on experience and the existing empirical evidence base. We provide a pragmatic conceptual overview of selected concrete examples of how existing theory-informed HIT evaluation frameworks may be used to inform the safe development and implementation of AI in health care settings. The list is not exhaustive and is intended to illustrate applications in line with various stakeholder requirements. Existing HIT evaluation frameworks can help to inform AI-based development and implementation by supporting developers and strategic decision makers in considering relevant technology, user, and organizational dimensions. This can facilitate the design of technologies, their implementation in user and organizational settings, and the sustainability and scalability of technologies.
Guidelines and Standard Frameworks for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Systematic Review

Kirubel Biruk Shiferaw,Moritz Roloff,Irina Balaur,Danielle Welter,Dagmar Waltemath,Atinkut Zeleke

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.27.24307991

2024-05-28

Abstract:A growing volume of evidence marks the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in medicine, in improving diagnostic accuracy, clinical decision support, risk/event prediction, drug discovery, and patient management. However, the continuous integration of AI into clinical settings requires the development of up-to-date and robust guidelines and standard frameworks that consider the evolving challenges of AI implementation in medicine. This review evaluates these guidelines quality and summarizes ethical frameworks, best practices, and recommendations. The Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool was used to assess the quality of guidelines based on six domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigor of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. The protocol of this review including the eligibility criteria, the search strategy data extraction sheet and methods, was published prior to the actual review with International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) of (DERR1-10.2196/47105). The initial search resulted in 4,975 studies from two databases and five studies from manual search. Nine articles were selected for data extraction based on the eligibility criteria. We found that while guidelines generally excel in scope, purpose, and editorial independence, there is significant variability in applicability and the rigour of guideline development. Well-established initiatives such as DECIDE-AI, SPIRIT-AI, and CONSORT-AI have shown high quality, particularly in terms of stakeholder involvement. However, applicability remains a prominent challenge among the guidelines. We conclude that the reproducibility, ethical and environmental aspects of AI in medicine still need attention from both medical and AI communities. This review emphasizes the crucial need for high-quality guidelines and opens a new avenue in evaluating guidelines themselves. Our work highlights the need for working toward the development of integrated and comprehensive reporting guidelines that adhere to the principles of Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability (FAIR). This alignment is essential for fostering a cultural shift towards transparency and open science, which are pivotal milestone for sustainable digital health research.
Translating ethical and quality principles for the effective, safe and fair development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence technologies in healthcare

Nicoleta J Economou-Zavlanos,Sophia Bessias,Michael P Cary,Armando D Bedoya,Benjamin A Goldstein,John E Jelovsek,Cara L O’Brien,Nancy Walden,Matthew Elmore,Amanda B Parrish,Scott Elengold,Kay S Lytle,Suresh Balu,Michael E Lipkin,Afreen Idris Shariff,Michael Gao,David Leverenz,Ricardo Henao,David Y Ming,David M Gallagher,Michael J Pencina,Eric G Poon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocad221

2023-11-29

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract:Abstract Objective The complexity and rapid pace of development of algorithmic technologies pose challenges for their regulation and oversight in healthcare settings. We sought to improve our institution’s approach to evaluation and governance of algorithmic technologies used in clinical care and operations by creating an Implementation Guide that standardizes evaluation criteria so that local oversight is performed in an objective fashion. Materials and Methods Building on a framework that applies key ethical and quality principles (clinical value and safety, fairness and equity, usability and adoption, transparency and accountability, and regulatory compliance), we created concrete guidelines for evaluating algorithmic technologies at our institution. Results An Implementation Guide articulates evaluation criteria used during review of algorithmic technologies and details what evidence supports the implementation of ethical and quality principles for trustworthy health AI. Application of the processes described in the Implementation Guide can lead to algorithms that are safer as well as more effective, fair, and equitable upon implementation, as illustrated through 4 examples of technologies at different phases of the algorithmic lifecycle that underwent evaluation at our academic medical center. Discussion By providing clear descriptions/definitions of evaluation criteria and embedding them within standardized processes, we streamlined oversight processes and educated communities using and developing algorithmic technologies within our institution. Conclusions We developed a scalable, adaptable framework for translating principles into evaluation criteria and specific requirements that support trustworthy implementation of algorithmic technologies in patient care and healthcare operations.

information science & library science,computer science, information systems, interdisciplinary applications,health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Economic evaluations of artificial intelligence-based healthcare interventions: A systematic literature review of best practices in their conduct and reporting

Jai Vithlani,Claire Hawksworth,Jamie Elvidge,Lynda Ayiku,Dalia Dawoud,Dalia M Dawoud

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1220950

IF: 5.6

2023-08-09

Frontiers in Pharmacology

Abstract:Objectives: Health economic evaluations (HEEs) help healthcare decision makers understand the value of new technologies. Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in healthcare interventions. We sought to review the conduct and reporting of published HEEs for AI-based health interventions. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review with a 15-month search window (April 2021 to June 2022) on 17 th June 2022 to identify HEEs of AI health interventions and update a previous review. Records were identified from 3 databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central). Two reviewers screened papers against predefined study selection criteria. Data were extracted from included studies using prespecified data extraction tables. Included studies were quality assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) checklist. Results were synthesized narratively. Results: A total of 21 studies were included. The most common type of AI intervention was automated image analysis (9/21, 43%) mainly used for screening or diagnosis in general medicine and oncology. Nearly all were cost-utility (10/21, 48%) or cost-effectiveness analyses (8/21, 38%) that took a healthcare system or payer perspective. Decision-analytic models were used in 16/21 (76%) studies, mostly Markov models and decision trees. Three (3/16, 19%) used a short-term decision tree followed by a longer-term Markov component. Thirteen studies (13/21, 62%) reported the AI intervention to be cost effective or dominant. Limitations tended to result from the input data, authorship conflicts of interest, and a lack of transparent reporting, especially regarding the AI nature of the intervention. Conclusion: Published HEEs of AI-based health interventions are rapidly increasing in number. Despite the potentially innovative nature of AI, most have used traditional methods like Markov models or decision trees. Most attempted to assess the impact on quality of life to present the cost per QALY gained. However, studies have not been comprehensively reported. Specific reporting standards for the economic evaluation of AI interventions would help improve transparency and promote their usefulness for decision making. This is fundamental for reimbursement decisions, which in turn will generate the necessary data to develop flexible models better suited to capturing the potentially dynamic nature of AI interventions.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Dynamic Evaluation Approaches to Telehealth Technologies and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Telemedicine Applications in Healthcare and Biotechnology Organizations

Darrell Norman Burrell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/merits3040042

2023-12-06

Merits

Abstract:The COVID-19 pandemic has ushered in an unprecedented adoption and integration of telehealth and artificial intelligence (AI) driven by telemedicine technologies into healthcare systems worldwide. These innovations promise to revolutionize healthcare delivery by offering greater accessibility, efficiency, and responsiveness to patient needs. However, the rapid deployment of these technologies in response to the crisis has illuminated the imperative need for systematic evaluation processes that comprehensively assess their operations and outcomes. This article underscores the critical importance of developing rigorous evaluation frameworks tailored to the evolving landscape of telehealth and AI-driven telemedicine technologies. The absence of standardized evaluation processes presents multifaceted challenges including uncertainties regarding long-term efficacy, patient safety, data security, and ethical considerations. Ensuring the responsible and effective integration of telehealth and AI into healthcare systems requires adaptable, multidimensional evaluation mechanisms that align with clinical objectives and regulatory standards. Through an examination of documents, procedures, policies, and best practices by regional hospitals, this article advocates for developing evaluation processes that enable stakeholders to optimize the deployment of telehealth and AI technologies fostering patient-centered care while addressing emerging challenges. In an era marked by healthcare transformation, establishing robust evaluation frameworks emerges as a paramount endeavor essential for realizing the full potential of telehealth and AI-driven telemedicine in the post-COVID-19 healthcare ecosystem.
Artificial Intelligence Applications in Health Care Practice: Scoping Review

Malvika Sharma,Carl Savage,Monika Nair,Ingrid Larsson,Petra Svedberg,Jens M Nygren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/40238

IF: 7.076

2022-10-06

Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract:Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is often heralded as a potential disruptor that will transform the practice of medicine. The amount of data collected and available in health care, coupled with advances in computational power, has contributed to advances in AI and an exponential growth of publications. However, the development of AI applications does not guarantee their adoption into routine practice. There is a risk that despite the resources invested, benefits for patients, staff, and society will not be realized if AI implementation is not better understood. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore how the implementation of AI in health care practice has been described and researched in the literature by answering 3 questions: What are the characteristics of research on implementation of AI in practice? What types and applications of AI systems are described? What characteristics of the implementation process for AI systems are discernible? Methods: A scoping review was conducted of MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases to identify empirical studies of AI implementation in health care since 2011, in addition to snowball sampling of selected reference lists. Using Rayyan software, we screened titles and abstracts and selected full-text articles. Data from the included articles were charted and summarized. Results: Of the 9218 records retrieved, 45 (0.49%) articles were included. The articles cover diverse clinical settings and disciplines; most (32/45, 71%) were published recently, were from high-income countries (33/45, 73%), and were intended for care providers (25/45, 56%). AI systems are predominantly intended for clinical care, particularly clinical care pertaining to patient-provider encounters. More than half (24/45, 53%) possess no action autonomy but rather support human decision-making. The focus of most research was on establishing the effectiveness of interventions (16/45, 35%) or related to technical and computational aspects of AI systems (11/45, 24%). Focus on the specifics of implementation processes does not yet seem to be a priority in research, and the use of frameworks to guide implementation is rare. Conclusions: Our current empirical knowledge derives from implementations of AI systems with low action autonomy and approaches common to implementations of other types of information systems. To develop a specific and empirically based implementation framework, further research is needed on the more disruptive types of AI systems being implemented in routine care and on aspects unique to AI implementation in health care, such as building trust, addressing transparency issues, developing explainable and interpretable solutions, and addressing ethical concerns around privacy and data protection.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Stakeholders’ views on the organisational factors affecting application of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a scoping review protocol

Reda Lebcir,Tetiana Hill,Rifat Atun,Marija Cubric

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044074

IF: 3.006

2021-03-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction Artificial intelligence (AI) offers great potential for transforming healthcare delivery leading to better patient-outcomes and more efficient care delivery. However, despite these advantages, integration of AI in healthcare has not kept pace with technological advancements. Previous research indicates the importance of understanding various organisational factors that shape integration of new technologies in healthcare. Therefore, the aim of this study is to provide an overview of the existing organisational factors influencing adoption of AI in healthcare from the perspectives of different relevant stakeholders. By conducting this review, the various organisational factors that facilitate or hinder AI implementation in healthcare could be identified. Methods and analysis This study will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute framework, which includes the following stages: (1) defining and aligning objectives and questions, (2) developing and aligning the inclusions criteria with objectives and questions, (3) describing the planned approach to evidence searching and selection, (4) searching for the evidence, (5) selecting the evidence, (6) extracting the evidence, (7) charting the evidence, and summarising the evidence with regard to the objectives and questions. The databases searched will be MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (Plus), PubMed, Cohrane Library, Scopus, MathSciNet, NICE Evidence, OpenGrey, O’REILLY and Social Care Online from January 2000 to June 2021. Search results will be reported based on The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews guidelines. The review will adopt diffusion of innovations theory, technology acceptance model and stakeholder theory as guiding conceptual models. Narrative synthesis will be used to integrate the findings. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval will not be sought for this scoping review as it only includes information from previously published studies. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal. In addition, to ensure its findings reach relevant stakeholders, they will be presented at relevant conferences.

medicine, general & internal
Artificial intelligence innovation in healthcare: Relevance of reporting guidelines for clinical translation from bench to bedside

Zhen Ling Teo,Ann Kwee,John Cw Lim,Carolyn Sp Lam,Dean Ho,Sebastian Maurer-Stroh,Yi Su,Simon Chesterman,Tsuhan Chen,Chorh Chuan Tan,Tien Yin Wong,Kee Yuan Ngiam,Cher Heng Tan,Danny Soon,May Ling Choong,Raymond Chua,Sutowo Wong,Colin Lim,Wei Yang Cheong,Daniel Sw Ting

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47102/annals-acadmedsg.2022452

2023-04-27

Abstract:Artificial intelligence (AI) and digital innovation are transforming healthcare. Technologies such as machine learning in image analysis, natural language processing in medical chatbots and electronic medical record extraction have the potential to improve screening, diagnostics and prognostication, leading to precision medicine and preventive health. However, it is crucial to ensure that AI research is conducted with scientific rigour to facilitate clinical implementation. Therefore, reporting guidelines have been developed to standardise and streamline the development and validation of AI technologies in health. This commentary proposes a structured approach to utilise these reporting guidelines for the translation of promising AI techniques from research and development into clinical translation, and eventual widespread implementation from bench to bedside.
Artificial intelligence for strengthening healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review

Tadeusz Ciecierski-Holmes,Ritvij Singh,Miriam Axt,Stephan Brenner,Sandra Barteit

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-022-00700-y

IF: 15.2

2022-10-29

npj Digital Medicine

Abstract:In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), AI has been promoted as a potential means of strengthening healthcare systems by a growing number of publications. We aimed to evaluate the scope and nature of AI technologies in the specific context of LMICs. In this systematic scoping review, we used a broad variety of AI and healthcare search terms. Our literature search included records published between 1st January 2009 and 30th September 2021 from the Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Global Health and APA PsycInfo databases, and grey literature from a Google Scholar search. We included studies that reported a quantitative and/or qualitative evaluation of a real-world application of AI in an LMIC health context. A total of 10 references evaluating the application of AI in an LMIC were included. Applications varied widely, including: clinical decision support systems, treatment planning and triage assistants and health chatbots. Only half of the papers reported which algorithms and datasets were used in order to train the AI. A number of challenges of using AI tools were reported, including issues with reliability, mixed impacts on workflows, poor user friendliness and lack of adeptness with local contexts. Many barriers exists that prevent the successful development and adoption of well-performing, context-specific AI tools, such as limited data availability, trust and evidence of cost-effectiveness in LMICs. Additional evaluations of the use of AI in healthcare in LMICs are needed in order to identify their effectiveness and reliability in real-world settings and to generate understanding for best practices for future implementations.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Standardizing and Scaffolding Healthcare AI-Chatbot Evaluation

Yining Hua,Winna Xia,David W. Bates,George Luke Hartstein,Hyungjin Tom Kim,Michael Lingzhi Li,Benjamin W Nelson,Charles Stromeyer IV,Darlene King,Jina Suh,Li Zhou,John Torous

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.21.24310774

2024-09-03

Abstract:The rapid rise of healthcare chatbots, valued at $787.1 million in 2022 and projected to grow at 23.9% annually through 2030, underscores the need for robust evaluation frameworks. Despite their potential, the absence of standardized evaluation criteria and rapid AI advancements complicate assessments. This study addresses these challenges by developing the first comprehensive evaluation framework inspired by health app regulations and integrating insights from diverse stakeholders. Following PRISMA guidelines, we reviewed 11 existing frameworks, refining 271 questions into a structured framework encompassing three priority constructs, 18 second-level constructs, and 60 third-level constructs. Our framework emphasizes safety, privacy, trustworthiness, and usefulness, aligning with recent concerns about AI in healthcare. This adaptable framework aims to serve as the initial step in facilitating the responsible integration of chatbots into healthcare settings.
An ethics assessment tool for artificial intelligence implementation in healthcare: CARE-AI

Yilin Ning,Xiaoxuan Liu,Gary S. Collins,Karel G. M. Moons,Melissa McCradden,Daniel Shu Wei Ting,Jasmine Chiat Ling Ong,Benjamin Alan Goldstein,Siegfried K. Wagner,Pearse A. Keane,Eric J. Topol,Nan Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-024-03310-1

IF: 82.9

2024-10-20

Nature Medicine

Abstract:The deployment of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered prediction models in healthcare can lead to ethical concerns about their implementation and upscaling. For example, AI prediction models can hinder clinical decision-making if they advise different diagnoses or treatments by sex and gender or by race and ethnicity without clear justification. Recent guidance (such as the WHO guidance on ethics and governance of AI for health and the Dutch guideline on AI for healthcare) and legislation (such as the European Union AI Act and the White House Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of AI in United States) have outlined important principles for the implementation of AI, including ethical considerations 1,2 . Health systems have responded by establishing governance committees and processes to ensure the safe and equitable implementation of AI tools 3 . However, there is currently no assessment tool that can identify and mitigate ethical issues during the implementation of AI prediction models in healthcare practice, including for public health. The development and validation of AI prediction models has benefited from detailed reporting and risk-of-bias tools, such as TRIPOD+AI 4 and PROBAST (with its forthcoming AI extension) for fairness and bias control and CLAIM 5 for data privacy, security and interpretability of AI imaging studies. However, when planning the implementation of a rigorously developed and well-performing AI prediction model in healthcare practice, existing recommendations and guidance on ethics are sparse and lack operational detail. For example, the DECIDE-AI reporting guideline 6 contains a small number of ethics-related recommendations for early clinical evaluation of AI concerning equity, safety and human-AI interaction, and FUTURE-AI 7 provides recommendations based on six principles (fairness, universality, traceability, usability, robustness and explainability) in model design, development, validation and deployment. A bioethics-centric delivery science toolkit for responsible AI implementation in healthcare is needed 8 .

biochemistry & molecular biology,cell biology,medicine, research & experimental
Ethical Framework for Harnessing the Power of AI in Healthcare and Beyond

Sidra Nasir,Rizwan Ahmed Khan,Samita Bai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3369912

2023-09-01

Abstract:In the past decade, the deployment of deep learning (Artificial Intelligence (AI)) methods has become pervasive across a spectrum of real-world applications, often in safety-critical contexts. This comprehensive research article rigorously investigates the ethical dimensions intricately linked to the rapid evolution of AI technologies, with a particular focus on the healthcare domain. Delving deeply, it explores a multitude of facets including transparency, adept data management, human oversight, educational imperatives, and international collaboration within the realm of AI advancement. Central to this article is the proposition of a conscientious AI framework, meticulously crafted to accentuate values of transparency, equity, answerability, and a human-centric orientation. The second contribution of the article is the in-depth and thorough discussion of the limitations inherent to AI systems. It astutely identifies potential biases and the intricate challenges of navigating multifaceted contexts. Lastly, the article unequivocally accentuates the pressing need for globally standardized AI ethics principles and frameworks. Simultaneously, it aptly illustrates the adaptability of the ethical framework proposed herein, positioned skillfully to surmount emergent challenges.

Computers and Society,Artificial Intelligence
Global Regulatory Frameworks for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Healthcare Services Sector

Kavitha Palaniappan,Elaine Yan Ting Lin,Silke Vogel,Elaine Lin Yan Ting

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12050562

2024-02-29

Health Care

Abstract:The healthcare sector is faced with challenges due to a shrinking healthcare workforce and a rise in chronic diseases that are worsening with demographic and epidemiological shifts. Digital health interventions that include artificial intelligence (AI) are being identified as some of the potential solutions to these challenges. The ultimate aim of these AI systems is to improve the patient's health outcomes and satisfaction, the overall population's health, and the well-being of healthcare professionals. The applications of AI in healthcare services are vast and are expected to assist, automate, and augment several healthcare services. Like any other emerging innovation, AI in healthcare also comes with its own risks and requires regulatory controls. A review of the literature was undertaken to study the existing regulatory landscape for AI in the healthcare services sector in developed nations. In the global regulatory landscape, most of the regulations for AI revolve around Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) and are regulated under digital health products. However, it is necessary to note that the current regulations may not suffice as AI-based technologies are capable of working autonomously, adapting their algorithms, and improving their performance over time based on the new real-world data that they have encountered. Hence, a global regulatory convergence for AI in healthcare, similar to the voluntary AI code of conduct that is being developed by the US-EU Trade and Technology Council, would be beneficial to all nations, be it developing or developed.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Health technology assessment framework for artificial intelligence-based technologies

Rossella Di Bidino,Signe Daugbjerg,Sara C. Papavero,Ira H. Haraldsen,Americo Cicchetti,Dario Sacchini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462324000308

2024-11-27

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Abstract:Objectives Artificial intelligence (AI)-based health technologies (AIHTs) have already been applied in clinical practice. However, there is currently no standardized framework for evaluating them based on the principles of health technology assessment (HTA). Methods A two-round Delphi survey was distributed to a panel of experts to determine the significance of incorporating topics outlined in the EUnetHTA Core Model and twenty additional ones identified through literature reviews. Each panelist assigned scores to each topic. Topics were categorized as critical to include (scores 7–9), important but not critical (scores 4–6), and not important (scores 1–3). A 70 percent cutoff was used to determine high agreement. Results Our panel of 46 experts indicated that 48 out of the 65 proposed topics are critical and should be included in an HTA framework for AIHTs. Among the ten most crucial topics, the following emerged: accuracy of the AI model (97.78 percent), patient safety (95.65 percent), benefit–harm balance evaluated from an ethical standpoint (95.56 percent), and bias in data (91.30 percent). Importantly, our findings highlight that the Core Model is insufficient in capturing all relevant topics for AI-based technologies, as 14 out of the additional 20 topics were identified as crucial. Conclusion It is imperative to determine the level of agreement on AI-relevant HTA topics to establish a robust assessment framework. This framework will play a foundational role in evaluating AI tools for the early diagnosis of dementia, which is the focus of the European project AI-Mind currently being developed.

public, environmental & occupational health,health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities

Jee Young Kim,Alifia Hasan,Kate Kellogg,William Ratliff,Sara Murray,Harini Suresh,Alexandra Valladares,Keo Shaw,Danny Tobey,David E Vidal,Mark A Lifson,Manesh Patel,Inioluwa Deborah Raji,Michael Gao,William Knechtle,Linda Tang,Suresh Balu,Mark P Sendak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.16.23297076

2024-02-19

Abstract:The use of data-driven technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) is growing in healthcare. However, the proliferation of healthcare AI tools has outpaced regulatory frameworks, accountability measures, and governance standards to ensure safe, effective, and equitable use. To address these gaps and tackle a common challenge faced by healthcare delivery organizations, a case-based workshop was organized, and a framework was developed to evaluate the potential impact of implementing an AI solution on health equity. The Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL) is co-designed with extensive engagement of clinical, operational, technical, and regulatory leaders across healthcare delivery organizations and ecosystem partners in the US. It assesses 5 equity assessment domains– accountability, fairness, fitness for purpose, reliability and validity, and transparency–across the span of eight key decision points in the AI adoption lifecycle. It is a process-oriented framework containing 37 step-by-step procedures for evaluating an existing AI solution and 34 procedures for evaluating a new AI solution in total. Within each procedure, it identifies relevant key stakeholders and data sources used to conduct the procedure. HEAAL guides how healthcare delivery organizations may mitigate the potential risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities. It also informs how much resources and support are required to assess the potential impact of AI solutions on health inequities.

Health Policy
Transformative Potential of AI in Healthcare: Definitions, Applications, and Navigating the Ethical Landscape and Public Perspectives

Molly Bekbolatova,Jonathan Mayer,Chi Wei Ong,Milan Toma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare12020125

2024-01-06

Health Care

Abstract:Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a crucial tool in healthcare with the primary aim of improving patient outcomes and optimizing healthcare delivery. By harnessing machine learning algorithms, natural language processing, and computer vision, AI enables the analysis of complex medical data. The integration of AI into healthcare systems aims to support clinicians, personalize patient care, and enhance population health, all while addressing the challenges posed by rising costs and limited resources. As a subdivision of computer science, AI focuses on the development of advanced algorithms capable of performing complex tasks that were once reliant on human intelligence. The ultimate goal is to achieve human-level performance with improved efficiency and accuracy in problem-solving and task execution, thereby reducing the need for human intervention. Various industries, including engineering, media/entertainment, finance, and education, have already reaped significant benefits by incorporating AI systems into their operations. Notably, the healthcare sector has witnessed rapid growth in the utilization of AI technology. Nevertheless, there remains untapped potential for AI to truly revolutionize the industry. It is important to note that despite concerns about job displacement, AI in healthcare should not be viewed as a threat to human workers. Instead, AI systems are designed to augment and support healthcare professionals, freeing up their time to focus on more complex and critical tasks. By automating routine and repetitive tasks, AI can alleviate the burden on healthcare professionals, allowing them to dedicate more attention to patient care and meaningful interactions. However, legal and ethical challenges must be addressed when embracing AI technology in medicine, alongside comprehensive public education to ensure widespread acceptance.

health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Barriers to and Facilitators of Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Health Care: Scoping Review

Masooma Hassan,Andre Kushniruk,Elizabeth Borycki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/48633

2024-08-29

Abstract:Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) use cases in health care are on the rise, with the potential to improve operational efficiency and care outcomes. However, the translation of AI into practical, everyday use has been limited, as its effectiveness relies on successful implementation and adoption by clinicians, patients, and other health care stakeholders. Objective: As adoption is a key factor in the successful proliferation of an innovation, this scoping review aimed at presenting an overview of the barriers to and facilitators of AI adoption in health care. Methods: A scoping review was conducted using the guidance provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. MEDLINE, IEEE Xplore, and ScienceDirect databases were searched to identify publications in English that reported on the barriers to or facilitators of AI adoption in health care. This review focused on articles published between January 2011 and December 2023. The review did not have any limitations regarding the health care setting (hospital or community) or the population (patients, clinicians, physicians, or health care administrators). A thematic analysis was conducted on the selected articles to map factors associated with the barriers to and facilitators of AI adoption in health care. Results: A total of 2514 articles were identified in the initial search. After title and abstract reviews, 50 (1.99%) articles were included in the final analysis. These articles were reviewed for the barriers to and facilitators of AI adoption in health care. Most articles were empirical studies, literature reviews, reports, and thought articles. Approximately 18 categories of barriers and facilitators were identified. These were organized sequentially to provide considerations for AI development, implementation, and the overall structure needed to facilitate adoption. Conclusions: The literature review revealed that trust is a significant catalyst of adoption, and it was found to be impacted by several barriers identified in this review. A governance structure can be a key facilitator, among others, in ensuring all the elements identified as barriers are addressed appropriately. The findings demonstrate that the implementation of AI in health care is still, in many ways, dependent on the establishment of regulatory and legal frameworks. Further research into a combination of governance and implementation frameworks, models, or theories to enhance trust that would specifically enable adoption is needed to provide the necessary guidance to those translating AI research into practice. Future research could also be expanded to include attempts at understanding patients' perspectives on complex, high-risk AI use cases and how the use of AI applications affects clinical practice and patient care, including sociotechnical considerations, as more algorithms are implemented in actual clinical environments.
A comprehensive overview of barriers and strategies for AI implementation in healthcare: Mixed-method design

Monika Nair,Petra Svedberg,Ingrid Larsson,Jens M Nygren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0305949

IF: 3.7

2024-08-09

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Implementation of artificial intelligence systems for healthcare is challenging. Understanding the barriers and implementation strategies can impact their adoption and allows for better anticipation and planning. This study's objective was to create a detailed inventory of barriers to and strategies for AI implementation in healthcare to support advancements in methods and implementation processes in healthcare. A sequential explanatory mixed method design was used. Firstly, scoping reviews and systematic literature reviews were identified using PubMed. Selected studies included empirical cases of AI implementation and use in clinical practice. As the reviews were deemed insufficient to fulfil the aim of the study, data collection shifted to the primary studies included in those reviews. The primary studies were screened by title and abstract, and thereafter read in full text. Then, data on barriers to and strategies for AI implementation were extracted from the included articles, thematically coded by inductive analysis, and summarized. Subsequently, a direct qualitative content analysis of 69 interviews with healthcare leaders and healthcare professionals confirmed and added results from the literature review. Thirty-eight empirical cases from the six identified scoping and literature reviews met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Barriers to and strategies for AI implementation were grouped under three phases of implementation (planning, implementing, and sustaining the use) and were categorized into eleven concepts; Leadership, Buy-in, Change management, Engagement, Workflow, Finance and human resources, Legal, Training, Data, Evaluation and monitoring, Maintenance. Ethics emerged as a twelfth concept through qualitative analysis of the interviews. This study illustrates the inherent challenges and useful strategies in implementing AI in healthcare practice. Future research should explore various aspects of leadership, collaboration and contracts among key stakeholders, legal strategies surrounding clinicians' liability, solutions to ethical dilemmas, infrastructure for efficient integration of AI in workflows, and define decision points in the implementation process.

The 7-stranded structure of relaxed scallop muscle myosin filaments: support for a common head configuration in myosin-regulated muscles.

Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Literature Review and Content Analysis of Frameworks

Evaluating Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Settings-Let Us Not Reinvent the Wheel

Guidelines and Standard Frameworks for Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Systematic Review

Translating ethical and quality principles for the effective, safe and fair development, deployment and use of artificial intelligence technologies in healthcare

Economic evaluations of artificial intelligence-based healthcare interventions: A systematic literature review of best practices in their conduct and reporting

Dynamic Evaluation Approaches to Telehealth Technologies and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Telemedicine Applications in Healthcare and Biotechnology Organizations

Artificial Intelligence Applications in Health Care Practice: Scoping Review

Stakeholders’ views on the organisational factors affecting application of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a scoping review protocol

Artificial intelligence innovation in healthcare: Relevance of reporting guidelines for clinical translation from bench to bedside

Artificial intelligence for strengthening healthcare systems in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic scoping review

Standardizing and Scaffolding Healthcare AI-Chatbot Evaluation

An ethics assessment tool for artificial intelligence implementation in healthcare: CARE-AI

Ethical Framework for Harnessing the Power of AI in Healthcare and Beyond

Global Regulatory Frameworks for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Healthcare Services Sector

Health technology assessment framework for artificial intelligence-based technologies

Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities

Transformative Potential of AI in Healthcare: Definitions, Applications, and Navigating the Ethical Landscape and Public Perspectives

Barriers to and Facilitators of Artificial Intelligence Adoption in Health Care: Scoping Review

A comprehensive overview of barriers and strategies for AI implementation in healthcare: Mixed-method design