Digital tools for youth health promotion: principles, policies and practices in sub-Saharan Africa.

Although digital health promotion (DHP) technologies for young people are increasingly available in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there has been insufficient research investigating whether existing ethical and policy frameworks are adequate to address the challenges and promote the technological opportunities in these settings. In an effort to fill this gap and as part of a larger research project, in November 2022, we conducted a workshop in Cape Town, South Africa, entitled 'Unlocking the Potential of Digital Health Promotion for Young People in Low- and Middle-Income Countries'. The workshop brought together 25 experts from the areas of digital health ethics, youth health and engagement, health policy and promotion and technology development, predominantly from sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), to explore their views on the ethics and governance and potential policy pathways of DHP for young people in LMICs. Using the World Café method, participants contributed their views on (i) the advantages and barriers associated with DHP for youth in LMICs, (ii) the availability and relevance of ethical and regulatory frameworks for DHP and (iii) the translation of ethical principles into policies and implementation practices required by these policies, within the context of SSA. Our thematic analysis of the ensuing discussion revealed a willingness to foster such technologies if they prove safe, do not exacerbate inequalities, put youth at the center and are subject to appropriate oversight. In addition, our work has led to the potential translation of fundamental ethical principles into the form of a policy roadmap for ethically aligned DHP for youth in SSA.

Evidence, ethics and the promise of artificial intelligence in psychiatry.

Researchers are studying how artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to better detect, prognosticate and subgroup diseases. The idea that AI might advance medicine's understanding of biological categories of psychiatric disorders, as well as provide better treatments, is appealing given the historical challenges with prediction, diagnosis and treatment in psychiatry. Given the power of AI to analyse vast amounts of information, some clinicians may feel obligated to align their clinical judgements with the outputs of the AI system. However, a potential epistemic privileging of AI in clinical judgements may lead to unintended consequences that could negatively affect patient treatment, well-being and rights. The implications are also relevant to precision medicine, digital twin technologies and predictive analytics generally. We propose that a commitment to epistemic humility can help promote judicious clinical decision-making at the interface of big data and AI in psychiatry.

A Research Ethics Framework for the Clinical Translation of Healthcare Machine Learning.

The application of artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) technologies in healthcare have immense potential to improve the care of patients. While there are some emerging practices surrounding responsible ML as well as regulatory frameworks, the traditional role of research ethics oversight has been relatively unexplored regarding its relevance for clinical ML. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive research ethics framework that can apply to the systematic inquiry of ML research across its development cycle. The pathway consists of three stages: (1) exploratory, hypothesis-generating data access; (2) silent period evaluation; (3) prospective clinical evaluation. We connect each stage to its literature and ethical justification and suggest adaptations to traditional paradigms to suit ML while maintaining ethical rigor and the protection of individuals. This pathway can accommodate a multitude of research designs from observational to controlled trials, and the stages can apply individually to a variety of ML applications.

Data governance functions to support responsible data stewardship in pediatric radiology research studies using artificial intelligence.

The integration of human and machine intelligence promises to profoundly change the practice of medicine. The rapidly increasing adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) solutions highlights its potential to streamline physician work and optimize clinical decision-making, also in the field of pediatric radiology. Large imaging databases are necessary for training, validating and testing these algorithms. To better promote data accessibility in multi-institutional AI-enabled radiologic research, these databases centralize the large volumes of data required to effect accurate models and outcome predictions. However, such undertakings must consider the sensitivity of patient information and therefore utilize requisite data governance measures to safeguard data privacy and security, to recognize and mitigate the effects of bias and to promote ethical use. In this article we define data stewardship and data governance, review their key considerations and applicability to radiologic research in the pediatric context, and consider the associated best practices along with the ramifications of poorly executed data governance. We summarize several adaptable data governance frameworks and describe strategies for their implementation in the form of distributed and centralized approaches to data management.

Medical artificial intelligence for clinicians: the lost cognitive perspective.

The development and commercialisation of medical decision systems based on artificial intelligence (AI) far outpaces our understanding of their value for clinicians. Although applicable across many forms of medicine, we focus on characterising the diagnostic decisions of radiologists through the concept of ecologically bounded reasoning, review the differences between clinician decision making and medical AI model decision making, and reveal how these differences pose fundamental challenges for integrating AI into radiology. We argue that clinicians are contextually motivated, mentally resourceful decision makers, whereas AI models are contextually stripped, correlational decision makers, and discuss misconceptions about clinician-AI interaction stemming from this misalignment of capabilities. We outline how future research on clinician-AI interaction could better address the cognitive considerations of decision making and be used to enhance the safety and usability of AI models in high-risk medical decision-making contexts.

Concordance of randomised controlled trials for artificial intelligence interventions with the CONSORT-AI reporting guidelines.

The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials extension for Artificial Intelligence interventions (CONSORT-AI) was published in September 2020. Since its publication, several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of AI interventions have been published but their completeness and transparency of reporting is unknown. This systematic review assesses the completeness of reporting of AI RCTs following publication of CONSORT-AI and provides a comprehensive summary of RCTs published in recent years. 65 RCTs were identified, mostly conducted in China (37%) and USA (18%). Median concordance with CONSORT-AI reporting was 90% (IQR 77-94%), although only 10 RCTs explicitly reported its use. Several items were consistently under-reported, including algorithm version, accessibility of the AI intervention or code, and references to a study protocol. Only 3 of 52 included journals explicitly endorsed or mandated CONSORT-AI. Despite a generally high concordance amongst recent AI RCTs, some AI-specific considerations remain systematically poorly reported. Further encouragement of CONSORT-AI adoption by journals and funders may enable more complete adoption of the full CONSORT-AI guidelines.

A normative framework for artificial intelligence as a sociotechnical system in healthcare.

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are of great interest to healthcare organizations for their potential to improve patient care, yet their translation into clinical settings remains inconsistent. One of the reasons for this gap is that good technical performance does not inevitably result in patient benefit. We advocate for a conceptual shift wherein AI tools are seen as components of an intervention ensemble. The intervention ensemble describes the constellation of practices that, together, bring about benefit to patients or health systems. Shifting from a narrow focus on the tool itself toward the intervention ensemble prioritizes a "sociotechnical" vision for translation of AI that values all components of use that support beneficial patient outcomes. The intervention ensemble approach can be used for regulation, institutional oversight, and for AI adopters to responsibly and ethically appraise, evaluate, and use AI tools.

Exploring potential barriers in equitable access to pediatric diagnostic imaging using machine learning.

In this work, we examine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US) appointments at the Diagnostic Imaging (DI) department of a pediatric hospital to discover possible relationships between selected patient features and no-show or long waiting room time endpoints. The chosen features include age, sex, income, distance from the hospital, percentage of non-English speakers in a postal code, percentage of single caregivers in a postal code, appointment time slot (morning, afternoon, evening), and day of the week (Monday to Sunday). We trained univariate Logistic Regression (LR) models using the training sets and identified predictive (significant) features that remained significant in the test sets. We also implemented multivariate Random Forest (RF) models to predict the endpoints. We achieved Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC) of 0.82 and 0.73 for predicting no-show and long waiting room time endpoints, respectively. The univariate LR analysis on DI appointments uncovered the effect of the time of appointment during the day/week, and patients' demographics such as income and the number of caregivers on the no-shows and long waiting room time endpoints. For predicting no-show, we found age, time slot, and percentage of single caregiver to be the most critical contributors. Age, distance, and percentage of non-English speakers were the most important features for our long waiting room time prediction models. We found no sex discrimination among the scheduled pediatric DI appointments. Nonetheless, inequities based on patient features such as low income and language barrier did exist.

Ethical tensions in the treatment of youth with severe anorexia nervosa.

Treatment of anorexia nervosa poses a moral quandary for clinicians, particularly in paediatrics. The challenges of appropriately individualising treatment while balancing prospective benefits against concomitant harms are best highlighted through exploration and discussion of the ethical issues. The purpose of this Viewpoint is to explore the ethical tensions in treating young patients (around ages 10-18 years) with severe anorexia nervosa who are not capable of making treatment-based decisions and describe how harm reduction can reasonably be applied. We propose the term AN-PLUS to refer to the subset of patients with a particularly concerning clinical presentation-poor quality of life, lack of treatment response, medically severe and unstable, and severe symptomatology-who might benefit from a harm reduction approach. From ethics literature, qualitative studies, and our clinical experience, we identify three core ethical themes in making treatment decisions for young people with AN-PLUS: capacity and autonomy, best interests, and person-centred care. Finally, we consider how a harm reduction approach can provide direction for developing a personalised treatment plan that retains a focus on best interests while attempting to mitigate the harms of involuntary treatment. We conclude with recommendations to operationalise a harm reduction approach in young people with AN-PLUS.

Understanding caregiver experiences with disease-modifying therapies for spinal muscular atrophy: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a neuromuscular disorder that manifests with motor deterioration and respiratory complications. The paradigm of care is shifting as disease-modifying therapies including nusinersen, onasemnogene abeparvovec and risdiplam alter the disease trajectory of SMA. The objective of this study was to explore caregivers' experiences with disease-modifying therapies for SMA. DESIGN: Qualitative study including semistructured interviews with caregivers of children with SMA who received disease-modifying therapies. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded and analysed using content analysis. SETTING: The Hospital for Sick Children (Toronto, Canada). RESULTS: Fifteen family caregivers of children with SMA type 1 (n=5), type 2 (n=5) and type 3 (n=5) participated. There were two emerging themes and several subthemes (in parentheses): (1) inequities in access to disease-modifying therapies (variable regulatory approvals, prohibitively expensive therapies and insufficient infrastructure) and (2) patient and family experience with disease-modifying therapies (decision making, hope, fear and uncertainty). CONCLUSION: The caregiver experience with SMA has been transformed by the advent of disease-modifying therapies. Consistent and predictable access to disease-modifying therapies is a major concern for caregivers of children with SMA but is influenced by regulatory approvals, funding and eligibility criteria that are heterogenous across jurisdictions. Many caregivers described going to great lengths to access therapies, highlighting issues related to justice, such as equity and access. This diverse population reflects contemporary patients and families with SMA; their broad experiences may inform the healthcare delivery of other emerging orphan drugs.

APPRAISE-AI Tool for Quantitative Evaluation of AI Studies for Clinical Decision Support.

Importance: Artificial intelligence (AI) has gained considerable attention in health care, yet concerns have been raised around appropriate methods and fairness. Current AI reporting guidelines do not provide a means of quantifying overall quality of AI research, limiting their ability to compare models addressing the same clinical question. Objective: To develop a tool (APPRAISE-AI) to evaluate the methodological and reporting quality of AI prediction models for clinical decision support. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study evaluated AI studies in the model development, silent, and clinical trial phases using the APPRAISE-AI tool, a quantitative method for evaluating quality of AI studies across 6 domains: clinical relevance, data quality, methodological conduct, robustness of results, reporting quality, and reproducibility. These domains included 24 items with a maximum overall score of 100 points. Points were assigned to each item, with higher points indicating stronger methodological or reporting quality. The tool was applied to a systematic review on machine learning to estimate sepsis that included articles published until September 13, 2019. Data analysis was performed from September to December 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were interrater and intrarater reliability and the correlation between APPRAISE-AI scores and expert scores, 3-year citation rate, number of Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) low risk-of-bias domains, and overall adherence to the Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) statement. Results: A total of 28 studies were included. Overall APPRAISE-AI scores ranged from 33 (low quality) to 67 (high quality). Most studies were moderate quality. The 5 lowest scoring items included source of data, sample size calculation, bias assessment, error analysis, and transparency. Overall APPRAISE-AI scores were associated with expert scores (Spearman ρ, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; P < .001), 3-year citation rate (Spearman ρ, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.43-0.85; P < .001), number of QUADAS-2 low risk-of-bias domains (Spearman ρ, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.24-0.77; P = .002), and adherence to the TRIPOD statement (Spearman ρ, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-0.94; P < .001). Intraclass correlation coefficient ranges for interrater and intrarater reliability were 0.74 to 1.00 for individual items, 0.81 to 0.99 for individual domains, and 0.91 to 0.98 for overall scores. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, APPRAISE-AI demonstrated strong interrater and intrarater reliability and correlated well with several study quality measures. This tool may provide a quantitative approach for investigators, reviewers, editors, and funding organizations to compare the research quality across AI studies for clinical decision support.