Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Detecting Algorithmic Errors and Patient Harms for AI-Enabled Medical Devices in Randomized Controlled Trials: Protocol for a Systematic Review.
Kale, Aditya U; Hogg, Henry David Jeffry; Pearson, Russell; Glocker, Ben; Golder, Su; Coombe, April; Waring, Justin; Liu, Xiaoxuan; Moore, David J; Denniston, Alastair K.
Afiliação
  • Kale AU; Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • Hogg HDJ; University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • Pearson R; NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • Glocker B; NIHR Incubator for AI and Digital Health Research, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • Golder S; Population Health Science Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
  • Coombe A; Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, London, United Kingdom.
  • Waring J; Kheiron Medical Technologies, London, United Kingdom.
  • Liu X; Department of Computing, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • Moore DJ; Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
  • Denniston AK; Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
JMIR Res Protoc ; 13: e51614, 2024 Jun 28.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38941147
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Artificial intelligence (AI) medical devices have the potential to transform existing clinical workflows and ultimately improve patient outcomes. AI medical devices have shown potential for a range of clinical tasks such as diagnostics, prognostics, and therapeutic decision-making such as drug dosing. There is, however, an urgent need to ensure that these technologies remain safe for all populations. Recent literature demonstrates the need for rigorous performance error analysis to identify issues such as algorithmic encoding of spurious correlations (eg, protected characteristics) or specific failure modes that may lead to patient harm. Guidelines for reporting on studies that evaluate AI medical devices require the mention of performance error analysis; however, there is still a lack of understanding around how performance errors should be analyzed in clinical studies, and what harms authors should aim to detect and report.

OBJECTIVE:

This systematic review will assess the frequency and severity of AI errors and adverse events (AEs) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating AI medical devices as interventions in clinical settings. The review will also explore how performance errors are analyzed including whether the analysis includes the investigation of subgroup-level outcomes.

METHODS:

This systematic review will identify and select RCTs assessing AI medical devices. Search strategies will be deployed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, and clinical trial registries to identify relevant papers. RCTs identified in bibliographic databases will be cross-referenced with clinical trial registries. The primary outcomes of interest are the frequency and severity of AI errors, patient harms, and reported AEs. Quality assessment of RCTs will be based on version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB2). Data analysis will include a comparison of error rates and patient harms between study arms, and a meta-analysis of the rates of patient harm in control versus intervention arms will be conducted if appropriate.

RESULTS:

The project was registered on PROSPERO in February 2023. Preliminary searches have been completed and the search strategy has been designed in consultation with an information specialist and methodologist. Title and abstract screening started in September 2023. Full-text screening is ongoing and data collection and analysis began in April 2024.

CONCLUSIONS:

Evaluations of AI medical devices have shown promising results; however, reporting of studies has been variable. Detection, analysis, and reporting of performance errors and patient harms is vital to robustly assess the safety of AI medical devices in RCTs. Scoping searches have illustrated that the reporting of harms is variable, often with no mention of AEs. The findings of this systematic review will identify the frequency and severity of AI performance errors and patient harms and generate insights into how errors should be analyzed to account for both overall and subgroup performance. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO CRD42023387747; https//www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=387747. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/51614.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Algoritmos / Inteligência Artificial / Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: JMIR Res Protoc Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Algoritmos / Inteligência Artificial / Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: JMIR Res Protoc Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido