Implementation frameworks for end-to-end clinical AI: derivation of the SALIENT framework

AI as an intervention: improving clinical outcomes relies on a causal approach to AI development and validation

The primary practice of healthcare artificial intelligence (AI) starts with model development, often using state-of-the-art AI, retrospectively evaluated using metrics lifted from the AI literature like AUROC and DICE score. However, good performance on these metrics may not translate to improved clinical outcomes. Instead, we argue for a better development pipeline constructed by working backward from the end goal of positively impacting clinically relevant outcomes using AI, leading to considerations of causality in model development and validation, and subsequently a better development pipeline. Healthcare AI should be "actionable," and the change in actions induced by AI should improve outcomes. Quantifying the effect of changes in actions on outcomes is causal inference. The development, evaluation, and validation of healthcare AI should therefore account for the causal effect of intervening with the AI on clinically relevant outcomes. Using a causal lens, we make recommendations for key stakeholders at various stages of the healthcare AI pipeline. Our recommendations aim to increase the positive impact of AI on clinical outcomes.

Machine learning-augmented interventions in perioperative care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We lack evidence on the cumulative effectiveness of machine learning (ML)-driven interventions in perioperative settings. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to appraise the evidence on the impact of ML-driven interventions on perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of ML-driven interventions in surgical inpatient populations. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023433163) and conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was conducted for outcomes with two or more studies using a random-effects model, and vote counting was conducted for other outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 13 included RCTs, three types of ML-driven interventions were evaluated: Hypotension Prediction Index (HPI) (n=5), Nociception Level Index (NoL) (n=7), and a scheduling system (n=1). Compared with the standard care, HPI led to a significant decrease in absolute hypotension (n=421, P=0.003, I2=75%) and relative hypotension (n=208, P<0.0001, I2=0%); NoL led to significantly lower mean pain scores in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) (n=191, P=0.004, I2=19%). NoL showed no significant impact on intraoperative opioid consumption (n=339, P=0.31, I2=92%) or PACU opioid consumption (n=339, P=0.11, I2=0%). No significant difference in hospital length of stay (n=361, P=0.81, I2=0%) and PACU stay (n=267, P=0.44, I2=0) was found between HPI and NoL.

CONCLUSIONS

HPI decreased the duration of intraoperative hypotension, and NoL decreased postoperative pain scores, but no significant impact on other clinical outcomes was found. We highlight the need to address both methodological and clinical practice gaps to ensure the successful future implementation of ML-driven interventions.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL

CRD42023433163 (PROSPERO).

Validating, Implementing, and Monitoring Machine Learning Solutions in the Clinical Laboratory Safely and Effectively

BACKGROUND

Machine learning solutions offer tremendous promise for improving clinical and laboratory operations in pathology. Proof-of-concept descriptions of these approaches have become commonplace in laboratory medicine literature, but only a scant few of these have been implemented within clinical laboratories, owing to the often substantial barriers in validating, implementing, and monitoring these applications in practice. This mini-review aims to highlight the key considerations in each of these steps.

CONTENT

Effective and responsible applications of machine learning in clinical laboratories require robust validation prior to implementation. A comprehensive validation study involves a critical evaluation of study design, data engineering and interoperability, target label definition, metric selection, generalizability and applicability assessment, algorithmic fairness, and explainability. While the main text highlights these concepts in broad strokes, a supplementary code walk-through is also provided to facilitate a more practical understanding of these topics using a real-world classification task example, the detection of saline-contaminated chemistry panels.Following validation, the laboratorian's role is far from over. Implementing machine learning solutions requires an interdisciplinary effort across several roles in an organization. We highlight the key roles, responsibilities, and terminologies for successfully deploying a validated solution into a live production environment. Finally, the implemented solution must be routinely monitored for signs of performance degradation and updated if necessary.

SUMMARY

This mini-review aims to bridge the gap between theory and practice by highlighting key concepts in validation, implementation, and monitoring machine learning solutions effectively and responsibly in the clinical laboratory.

Automating Dental Condition Detection on Panoramic Radiographs: Challenges, Pitfalls, and Opportunities

Background/Objectives: The integration of AI into dentistry holds promise for improving diagnostic workflows, particularly in the detection of dental pathologies and pre-radiotherapy screening for head and neck cancer patients. This study aimed to develop and validate an AI model for detecting various dental conditions, with a focus on identifying teeth at risk prior to radiotherapy. Methods: A YOLOv8 model was trained on a dataset of 1628 annotated panoramic radiographs and externally validated on 180 radiographs from multiple centers. The model was designed to detect a variety of dental conditions, including periapical lesions, impacted teeth, root fragments, prosthetic restorations, and orthodontic devices. Results: The model showed strong performance in detecting implants, endodontic treatments, and surgical devices, with precision and recall values exceeding 0.8 for several conditions. However, performance declined during external validation, highlighting the need for improvements in generalizability. Conclusions: YOLOv8 demonstrated robust detection capabilities for several dental conditions, especially in training data. However, further refinement is needed to enhance generalizability in external datasets and improve performance for conditions like periapical lesions and bone loss.

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Inborn Errors of Immunity: Current State and Future Promise

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) research within medicine has exponentially increased over the last decade, with studies showcasing the potential of AI/ML algorithms to improve clinical practice and outcomes. Ongoing research and efforts to develop AI-based models have expanded to aid in the identification of inborn errors of immunity (IEI). The use of larger electronic health record data sets, coupled with advances in phenotyping precision and enhancements in ML techniques, has the potential to significantly improve the early recognition of IEI, thereby increasing access to equitable care. In this review, we provide a comprehensive examination of AI/ML for IEI, covering the spectrum from data preprocessing for AI/ML analysis to current applications within immunology, and address the challenges associated with implementing clinical decision support systems to refine the diagnosis and management of IEI.

Achieving large-scale clinician adoption of AI-enabled decision support

Computerised decision support (CDS) tools enabled by artificial intelligence (AI) seek to enhance accuracy and efficiency of clinician decision-making at the point of care. Statistical models developed using machine learning (ML) underpin most current tools. However, despite thousands of models and hundreds of regulator-approved tools internationally, large-scale uptake into routine clinical practice has proved elusive. While underdeveloped system readiness and investment in AI/ML within Australia and perhaps other countries are impediments, clinician ambivalence towards adopting these tools at scale could be a major inhibitor. We propose a set of principles and several strategic enablers for obtaining broad clinician acceptance of AI/ML-enabled CDS tools.

Systematic review and longitudinal analysis of implementing Artificial Intelligence to predict clinical deterioration in adult hospitals: what is known and what remains uncertain

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors influencing implementation of machine learning algorithms (MLAs) that predict clinical deterioration in hospitalized adult patients and relate these to a validated implementation framework.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of studies of implemented or trialed real-time clinical deterioration prediction MLAs was undertaken, which identified: how MLA implementation was measured; impact of MLAs on clinical processes and patient outcomes; and barriers, enablers and uncertainties within the implementation process. Review findings were then mapped to the SALIENT end-to-end implementation framework to identify the implementation stages at which these factors applied.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven articles relating to 14 groups of MLAs were identified, each trialing or implementing a bespoke algorithm. One hundred and seven distinct implementation evaluation metrics were identified. Four groups reported decreased hospital mortality, 1 significantly. We identified 24 barriers, 40 enablers, and 14 uncertainties and mapped these to the 5 stages of the SALIENT implementation framework.

DISCUSSION

Algorithm performance across implementation stages decreased between in silico and trial stages. Silent plus pilot trial inclusion was associated with decreased mortality, as was the use of logistic regression algorithms that used less than 39 variables. Mitigation of alert fatigue via alert suppression and threshold configuration was commonly employed across groups.

CONCLUSIONS

: There is evidence that real-world implementation of clinical deterioration prediction MLAs may improve clinical outcomes. Various factors identified as influencing success or failure of implementation can be mapped to different stages of implementation, thereby providing useful and practical guidance for implementers.