Lung Cancer Screening Before and After a Multifaceted Electronic Health Record Intervention: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

Importance: Lung cancer is the deadliest cancer in the US. Early-stage lung cancer detection with lung cancer screening (LCS) through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) improves outcomes. Objective: To assess the association of a multifaceted clinical decision support intervention with rates of identification and completion of recommended LCS-related services. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized controlled trial used an interrupted time series design, including 3 study periods from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2022: baseline (12 months), period 1 (11 months), and period 2 (9 months). Outcome changes were reported as shifts in the outcome level at the beginning of each period and changes in monthly trend (ie, slope). The study was conducted at primary care and pulmonary clinics at a health care system headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, among patients aged 55 to 80 years who had smoked 30 pack-years or more and were current smokers or had quit smoking in the past 15 years. Data were analyzed from September 2023 through February 2024. Interventions: Interventions in period 1 included clinician-facing preventive care reminders, an electronic health record-integrated shared decision-making tool, and narrative LCS guidance provided in the LDCT ordering screen. Interventions in period 2 included the same clinician-facing interventions and patient-facing reminders for LCS discussion and LCS. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was LCS care gap closure, defined as the identification and completion of recommended care services. LCS care gap closure could be achieved through LDCT completion, other chest CT completion, or LCS shared decision-making. Results: The study included 1865 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [60-70] years; 759 female [40.7%]). The clinician-facing intervention (period 1) was not associated with changes in level but was associated with an increase in slope of 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 2.4-2.7 percentage points) per month in care gap closure through any means and 1.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4-1.8 percentage points) per month in closure through LDCT. In period 2, introduction of patient-facing reminders was associated with an immediate increase in care gap closure (2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.0-3.6 percentage points) and closure through LDCT (2.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.9-3.9 percentage points) but was not associated with an increase in slope. The overall care gap closure rate was 175 of 1104 patients (15.9%) at the end of the baseline period vs 588 of 1255 patients (46.9%) at the end of period 2. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, a multifaceted intervention was associated with an improvement in LCS care gap closure. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498052.

Association of Diagnostic Discrepancy with Length of Stay and Mortality in Congestive Heart Failure Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department.

The goal of this study was to analyze diagnostic discrepancies between emergency department (ED) and hospital discharge diagnoses in patients with congestive heart failure admitted to the ED. Using a synthetic dataset from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the patients' primary diagnoses were compared at two levels: diagnostic category and body system. With 12,621 patients and 24,235 admission cases, the study found a 58% mismatch rate at the category level, which was reduced to 30% at the body system level. Diagnostic categories associated with higher levels of mismatch included aplastic anemia, pneumonia, and bacterial infections. In contrast, diagnostic categories associated with lower levels of mismatch included alcohol-related disorders, COVID-19, cardiac dysrhythmias, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Further investigation revealed that diagnostic mismatches are associated with longer hospital stays and higher mortality rates. These findings highlight the importance of reducing diagnostic uncertainty, particularly in specific diagnostic categories and body systems, to improve patient care following ED admission.

Design and implementation of electronic health record-based tools to support a weight management program in primary care.

Objectives: This paper reports on a mixed methods formative evaluation to support the design and implementation of information technology (IT) tools for a primary care weight management intervention delivered through the patient portal using primary care staff as coaches. Methods: We performed a qualitative needs assessment, designed the IT tools to support the weight management program, and developed implementation tracking metrics. Implementation tracking metrics were designed to use real world electronic health record (EHR) data. Results: The needs assessment revealed IT requirements as well as barriers and facilitators to implementation of EHR-based weight management interventions in primary care. We developed implementation metrics for the IT tools. These metrics were used in weekly project team calls to make sure that project resources were allocated to areas of need. Conclusion: This study identifies the important role of IT in supporting weight management through patient identification, weight and activity tracking in the patient portal, and the use of the EHR as a population management tool. An intensive multi-level implementation approach is required for successful primary care-based weight management interventions including well-designed IT tools, comprehensive involvement of clinic leadership, and implementation tracking metrics to guide the process of workflow integration. This study helps to bridge the gap between informatics and implementation by using socio-technical formative evaluation methods early in order to support the implementation of IT tools. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04420936. Registered June 9, 2020.

Genetically guided precision medicine clinical decision support tools: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Patient care using genetics presents complex challenges. Clinical decision support (CDS) tools are a potential solution because they provide patient-specific risk assessments and/or recommendations at the point of care. This systematic review evaluated the literature on CDS systems which have been implemented to support genetically guided precision medicine (GPM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE and Embase, encompassing January 1, 2011-March 14, 2023. The review included primary English peer-reviewed research articles studying humans, focused on the use of computers to guide clinical decision-making and delivering genetically guided, patient-specific assessments, and/or recommendations to healthcare providers and/or patients. RESULTS: The search yielded 3832 unique articles. After screening, 41 articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Alerts and reminders were the most common form of CDS used. About 27 systems were integrated with the electronic health record; 2 of those used standards-based approaches for genomic data transfer. Three studies used a framework to analyze the implementation strategy. DISCUSSION: Findings include limited use of standards-based approaches for genomic data transfer, system evaluations that do not employ formal frameworks, and inconsistencies in the methodologies used to assess genetic CDS systems and their impact on patient outcomes. CONCLUSION: We recommend that future research on CDS system implementation for genetically GPM should focus on implementing more CDS systems, utilization of standards-based approaches, user-centered design, exploration of alternative forms of CDS interventions, and use of formal frameworks to systematically evaluate genetic CDS systems and their effects on patient care.

Implementing weight maintenance with existing staff and electronic health record tools in a primary care setting: Baseline results from the MAINTAIN PRIME trial.

BACKGROUND: There is need for interventions that can assist with long-term maintenance of healthy body weight and be sustainably integrated into existing primary care teams. The goal of MAINTAIN PRIME (Promoting Real (World) IMplEmentation) is to evaluate whether a successful electronic health record (EHR)-based weight maintenance intervention can be adapted to a new clinical setting with primary care staff serving as coaches. METHODS: EHR tools include tracking tools, standardized surveys, and standardized "SmartPhrases" for coaching. Inclusion criteria were age 18-75 years, voluntary 5% weight loss in the past 2 years with prior BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, and no bariatric procedures in past 2 years. Participants were randomized 1:1 to tailored online coaching with EHR tracking tools (coaching) or EHR tracking tools alone (tracking). RESULTS: We screened 405 individuals between September 2021 and April 2023; 269 participants enrolled (134 coaching; 135 tracking). The most common reason for not enrolling was ineligibility (55%). At baseline, participants were 50.3 (SD 15.02) years old, 66.4% female, and 84% White; 83.7% reported moderate physical activity. Average weight and BMI at baseline were 205.0 (SD 48.9) lbs. and 33.2 (6.8) kg/m2, respectively. Participants lost an average of 10.7% (SD 5.2) of their body weight before enrolling. We recruited 39 primary care coaches over the same period. Conclusion The study successfully identified and recruited primary care patients with recent intentional weight loss for participation in a weight maintenance program that uses EHR-based tools. We also successfully recruited and trained primary care staff as coaches.

SCALE-UP II: protocol for a pragmatic randomised trial examining population health management interventions to increase the uptake of at-home COVID-19 testing in community health centres.

INTRODUCTION: SCALE-UP II aims to investigate the effectiveness of population health management interventions using text messaging (TM), chatbots and patient navigation (PN) in increasing the uptake of at-home COVID-19 testing among patients in historically marginalised communities, specifically, those receiving care at community health centres (CHCs). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The trial is a multisite, randomised pragmatic clinical trial. Eligible patients are >18 years old with a primary care visit in the last 3 years at one of the participating CHCs. Demographic data will be obtained from CHC electronic health records. Patients will be randomised to one of two factorial designs based on smartphone ownership. Patients who self-report replying to a text message that they have a smartphone will be randomised in a 2×2×2 factorial fashion to receive (1) chatbot or TM; (2) PN (yes or no); and (3) repeated offers to interact with the interventions every 10 or 30 days. Participants who do not self-report as having a smartphone will be randomised in a 2×2 factorial fashion to receive (1) TM with or without PN; and (2) repeated offers every 10 or 30 days. The interventions will be sent in English or Spanish, with an option to request at-home COVID-19 test kits. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants using at-home COVID-19 tests during a 90-day follow-up. The study will evaluate the main effects and interactions among interventions, implementation outcomes and predictors and moderators of study outcomes. Statistical analyses will include logistic regression, stratified subgroup analyses and adjustment for stratification factors. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the University of Utah Institutional Review Board. On completion, study data will be made available in compliance with National Institutes of Health data sharing policies. Results will be disseminated through study partners and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05533918 and NCT05533359.

The Business Process Management for Healthcare (BPM+ Health) Consortium: motivation, methodology, and deliverables for enabling clinical knowledge interoperability (CKI).

OBJECTIVES: To enhance the Business Process Management (BPM)+ Healthcare language portfolio by incorporating knowledge types not previously covered and to improve the overall effectiveness and expressiveness of the suite to improve Clinical Knowledge Interoperability. METHODS: We used the BPM+ Health and Object Management Group (OMG) standards development methodology to develop new languages, following a gap analysis between existing BPM+ Health languages and clinical practice guideline knowledge types. Proposal requests were developed based on these requirements, and submission teams were formed to respond to them. The resulting proposals were submitted to OMG for ratification. RESULTS: The BPM+ Health family of languages, which initially consisted of the Business Process Model and Notation, Decision Model and Notation, and Case Model and Notation, was expanded by adding 5 new language standards through the OMG. These include Pedigree and Provenance Model and Notation for expressing epistemic knowledge, Knowledge Package Model and Notation for supporting packaging knowledge, Shared Data Model and Notation for expressing ontic knowledge, Party Model and Notation for representing entities and organizations, and Specification Common Elements, a language providing a standard abstract and reusable library that underpins the 4 new languages. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In this effort, we adopted a strategy of separation of concerns to promote a portfolio of domain-agnostic, independent, but integrated domain-specific languages for authoring medical knowledge. This strategy is a practical and effective approach to expressing complex medical knowledge. These new domain-specific languages offer various knowledge-type options for clinical knowledge authors to choose from without potentially adding unnecessary overhead or complexity.

Enhanced family history-based algorithms increase the identification of individuals meeting criteria for genetic testing of hereditary cancer syndromes but would not reduce disparities on their own.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to 1) investigate algorithm enhancements for identifying patients eligible for genetic testing of hereditary cancer syndromes using family history data from electronic health records (EHRs); and 2) assess their impact on relative differences across sex, race, ethnicity, and language preference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study used EHR data from a tertiary academic medical center. A baseline rule-base algorithm, relying on structured family history data (structured data; SD), was enhanced using a natural language processing (NLP) component and a relaxed criteria algorithm (partial match [PM]). The identification rates and differences were analyzed considering sex, race, ethnicity, and language preference. RESULTS: Among 120,007 patients aged 25-60, detection rate differences were found across all groups using the SD (all P < 0.001). Both enhancements increased identification rates; NLP led to a 1.9 % increase and the relaxed criteria algorithm (PM) led to an 18.5 % increase (both P < 0.001). Combining SD with NLP and PM yielded a 20.4 % increase (P < 0.001). Similar increases were observed within subgroups. Relative differences persisted across most categories for the enhanced algorithms, with disproportionately higher identification of patients who are White, Female, non-Hispanic, and whose preferred language is English. CONCLUSION: Algorithm enhancements increased identification rates for patients eligible for genetic testing of hereditary cancer syndromes, regardless of sex, race, ethnicity, and language preference. However, differences in identification rates persisted, emphasizing the need for additional strategies to reduce disparities such as addressing underlying biases in EHR family health information and selectively applying algorithm enhancements for disadvantaged populations. Systematic assessment of differences in algorithm performance across population subgroups should be incorporated into algorithm development processes.

Design of an interface to communicate artificial intelligence-based prognosis for patients with advanced solid tumors: a user-centered approach.

OBJECTIVES: To design an interface to support communication of machine learning (ML)-based prognosis for patients with advanced solid tumors, incorporating oncologists' needs and feedback throughout design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using an interdisciplinary user-centered design approach, we performed 5 rounds of iterative design to refine an interface, involving expert review based on usability heuristics, input from a color-blind adult, and 13 individual semi-structured interviews with oncologists. Individual interviews included patient vignettes and a series of interfaces populated with representative patient data and predicted survival for each treatment decision point when a new line of therapy (LoT) was being considered. Ongoing feedback informed design decisions, and directed qualitative content analysis of interview transcripts was used to evaluate usability and identify enhancement requirements. RESULTS: Design processes resulted in an interface with 7 sections, each addressing user-focused questions, supporting oncologists to "tell a story" as they discuss prognosis during a clinical encounter. The iteratively enhanced interface both triggered and reflected design decisions relevant when attempting to communicate ML-based prognosis, and exposed misassumptions. Clinicians requested enhancements that emphasized interpretability over explainability. Qualitative findings confirmed that previously identified issues were resolved and clarified necessary enhancements (eg, use months not days) and concerns about usability and trust (eg, address LoT received elsewhere). Appropriate use should be in the context of a conversation with an oncologist. CONCLUSION: User-centered design, ongoing clinical input, and a visualization to communicate ML-related outcomes are important elements for designing any decision support tool enabled by artificial intelligence, particularly when communicating prognosis risk.

Considerations for using predictive models that include race as an input variable: The case study of lung cancer screening.

Indiscriminate use of predictive models incorporating race can reinforce biases present in source data and lead to an exacerbation of health disparities. In some countries, such as the United States, there is therefore a push to remove race from prediction models; however, there are still many prediction models that use race as an input. Biomedical informaticists who are given the responsibility of using these predictive models in healthcare environments are likely to be faced with questions like how to deal with race covariates in these models. Thus, there is a need for a pragmatic framework to help model users think through how to include race in their chosen model so as to avoid inadvertently exacerbating disparities. In this paper, we use the case study of lung cancer screening to propose a simple framework to guide how model users can approach the use (or non-use) of race inputs in the predictive models they are tasked with leveraging in electronic health records and clinical workflows.

Methods for Using Race and Ethnicity in Prediction Models for Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility.

Importance: Using race and ethnicity in clinical prediction models can reduce or inadvertently increase racial and ethnic disparities in medical decisions. Objective: To compare eligibility for lung cancer screening in a contemporary representative US population by refitting the life-years gained from screening-computed tomography (LYFS-CT) model to exclude race and ethnicity vs a counterfactual eligibility approach that recalculates life expectancy for racial and ethnic minority individuals using the same covariates but substitutes White race and uses the higher predicted life expectancy, ensuring that historically underserved groups are not penalized. Design, Setting, and Participants: The 2 submodels composing LYFS-CT NoRace were refit and externally validated without race and ethnicity: the lung cancer death submodel in participants of a large clinical trial (recruited 1993-2001; followed up until December 31, 2009) who ever smoked (n = 39 180) and the all-cause mortality submodel in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 1997-2001 participants aged 40 to 80 years who ever smoked (n = 74 842, followed up until December 31, 2006). Screening eligibility was examined in NHIS 2015-2018 participants aged 50 to 80 years who ever smoked. Data were analyzed from June 2021 to September 2022. Exposure: Including and removing race and ethnicity (African American, Asian American, Hispanic American, White) in each LYFS-CT submodel. Main Outcomes and Measures: By race and ethnicity: calibration of the LYFS-CT NoRace model and the counterfactual approach (ratio of expected to observed [E/O] outcomes), US individuals eligible for screening, predicted days of life gained from screening by LYFS-CT. Results: The NHIS 2015-2018 included 25 601 individuals aged 50 to 80 years who ever smoked (2769 African American, 649 Asian American, 1855 Hispanic American, and 20 328 White individuals). Removing race and ethnicity from the submodels underestimated lung cancer death risk (expected/observed [E/O], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-1.00) and all-cause mortality (E/O, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.94) in African American individuals. It also overestimated mortality in Hispanic American (E/O, 1.08, 95% CI, 1.00-1.16) and Asian American individuals (E/O, 1.14, 95% CI, 1.01-1.30). Consequently, the LYFS-CT NoRace model increased Hispanic American and Asian American eligibility by 108% and 73%, respectively, while reducing African American eligibility by 39%. Using LYFS-CT with the counterfactual all-cause mortality model better maintained calibration across groups and increased African American eligibility by 13% without reducing eligibility for Hispanic American and Asian American individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, removing race and ethnicity miscalibrated LYFS-CT submodels and substantially reduced African American eligibility for lung cancer screening. Under counterfactual eligibility, no one became ineligible, and African American eligibility increased, demonstrating the potential for maintaining model accuracy while reducing disparities.

Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care and Pulmonary Clinics: Pragmatic Clinical Trial of Electronic Health Record-Integrated Everyday Shared Decision-Making Tool and Clinician-Facing Prompts.

BACKGROUND: Although low-dose CT (LDCT) scan imaging lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality, it remains underused. Shared decision-making (SDM) is recommended to assess the balance of benefits and harms for each patient. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do clinician-facing electronic health record (EHR) prompts and an EHR-integrated everyday SDM tool designed to support routine incorporation of SDM into primary care improve LDCT scan imaging ordering and completion? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A preintervention and postintervention analysis was conducted in 30 primary care and four pulmonary clinics for visits with patients who met United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria for LCS. Propensity scores were used to adjust for covariates. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the expected benefit from screening (high benefit vs intermediate benefit), pulmonologist involvement (ie, whether the patient was seen in a pulmonary clinic in addition to a primary care clinic), sex, and race and ethnicity. RESULTS: In the 12-month preintervention phase among 1,090 eligible patients, 77 patients (7.1%) had LDCT scan imaging orders and 48 patients (4.4%) completed screenings. In the 9-month intervention phase among 1,026 eligible patients, 280 patients (27.3%) had LDCT scan imaging orders and 182 patients (17.7%) completed screenings. Adjusted ORs were 4.9 (95% CI, 3.4-6.9; P < .001) and 4.7 (95% CI, 3.1-7.1; P < .001) for LDCT imaging ordering and completion, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed increases in ordering and completion for all patient subgroups. In the intervention phase, the SDM tool was used by 23 of 102 ordering providers (22.5%) and for 69 of 274 patients (25.2%) for whom LDCT scan imaging was ordered and who needed SDM at the time of ordering. INTERPRETATION: Clinician-facing EHR prompts and an EHR-integrated everyday SDM tool are promising approaches to improving LCS in the primary care setting. However, room for improvement remains. As such, further research is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT04498052; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Rapid-cycle designs to adapt interventions for COVID-19 in safety-net healthcare systems.

Racial/ethnic minority, low socioeconomic status, and rural populations are disproportionately affected by COVID-19. Developing and evaluating interventions to address COVID-19 testing and vaccination among these populations are crucial to improving health inequities. The purpose of this paper is to describe the application of a rapid-cycle design and adaptation process from an ongoing trial to address COVID-19 among safety-net healthcare system patients. The rapid-cycle design and adaptation process included: (a) assessing context and determining relevant models/frameworks; (b) determining core and modifiable components of interventions; and (c) conducting iterative adaptations using Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles. PDSA cycles included: Plan. Gather information from potential adopters/implementers (e.g., Community Health Center [CHC] staff/patients) and design initial interventions; Do. Implement interventions in single CHC or patient cohort; Study. Examine process, outcome, and context data (e.g., infection rates); and, Act. If necessary, refine interventions based on process and outcome data, then disseminate interventions to other CHCs and patient cohorts. Seven CHC systems with 26 clinics participated in the trial. Rapid-cycle, PDSA-based adaptations were made to adapt to evolving COVID-19-related needs. Near real-time data used for adaptation included data on infection hot spots, CHC capacity, stakeholder priorities, local/national policies, and testing/vaccine availability. Adaptations included those to study design, intervention content, and intervention cohorts. Decision-making included multiple stakeholders (e.g., State Department of Health, Primary Care Association, CHCs, patients, researchers). Rapid-cycle designs may improve the relevance and timeliness of interventions for CHCs and other settings that provide care to populations experiencing health inequities, and for rapidly evolving healthcare challenges such as COVID-19.

Racial/ethnic minority, low socioeconomic status, and rural populations experience a disproportionate burden of COVID-19. Finding ways to address COVID-19 among these populations is crucial to improving health inequities. The purpose of this paper is to describe the rapid-cycle design process for a research project to address COVID-19 testing and vaccination among safety-net healthcare system patients. The project used real-time information on changes in COVID-19 policy (e.g., vaccination authorization), local case rates, and the capacity of safety-net healthcare systems to iteratively change interventions to ensure interventions were relevant and timely for patients. Key changes that were made to interventions included a change to the study design to include vaccination as a focus of the interventions after the vaccine was authorized; change in intervention content according to the capacity of local Community Health Centers to provide testing to patients; and changes to intervention cohorts such that priority groups of patients were selected for intervention based on characteristics including age, residency in an infection "hot spot," or race/ethnicity. Iteratively improving interventions based on real-time data collection may increase intervention relevance and timeliness, and rapid-cycle adaptions can be successfully implemented in resource constrained settings like safety-net healthcare systems.

Systematic User-centered Design of a Prototype Clinical Decision Support System for Glaucoma.

Purpose: To rigorously develop a prototype clinical decision support (CDS) system to help clinicians determine the appropriate timing for follow-up visual field testing for patients with glaucoma and to identify themes regarding the context of use for glaucoma CDS systems, design requirements, and design solutions to meet these requirements. Design: Semistructured qualitative interviews and iterative design cycles. Participants: Clinicians who care for patients with glaucoma, purposefully sampled to ensure a representation of a range of clinical specialties (glaucoma specialist, general ophthalmologist, optometrist) and years in clinical practice. Methods: Using the established User-Centered Design Process framework, we conducted semistructured interviews with 5 clinicians that addressed the context of use and design requirements for a glaucoma CDS system. We analyzed the interviews using inductive thematic analysis and grounded theory to generate themes regarding the context of use and design requirements. We created design solutions to address these requirements and used iterative design cycles with the clinicians to refine the CDS prototype. Main Outcome Measures: Themes regarding decision support for determining the timing of visual field testing for patients with glaucoma, CDS design requirements, and CDS design features. Results: We identified 9 themes that addressed the context of use for the CDS system, 9 design requirements for the prototype CDS system, and 9 design features intended to address these design requirements. Key design requirements included the preservation of clinician autonomy, incorporation of currently used heuristics, compilation of data, and increasing and communicating the level of certainty regarding the decision. After completing 3 iterative design cycles using this preliminary CDS system design solution, the design was satisfactory to the clinicians and was accepted as our prototype glaucoma CDS system. Conclusions: We used a systematic design process based on the established User-Centered Design Process to rigorously develop a prototype glaucoma CDS system, which will be used as a starting point for a future, large-scale iterative refinement and implementation process. Clinicians who care for patients with glaucoma need CDS systems that preserve clinician autonomy, compile and present data, incorporate currently used heuristics, and increase and communicate the level of certainty regarding the decision. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Artificial Intelligence and Cancer Control: Toward Prioritizing Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) in Emerging Decision Support Technologies.

PURPOSE FOR REVIEW: This perspective piece has two goals: first, to describe issues related to artificial intelligence-based applications for cancer control as they may impact health inequities or disparities; and second, to report on a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of artificial intelligence-based tools for cancer control to ascertain the extent to which discussions of justice, equity, diversity, inclusion, or health disparities manifest in syntheses of the field's best evidence. RECENT FINDINGS: We found that, while a significant proportion of existing syntheses of research on AI-based tools in cancer control use formal bias assessment tools, the fairness or equitability of models is not yet systematically analyzable across studies. Issues related to real-world use of AI-based tools for cancer control, such as workflow considerations, measures of usability and acceptance, or tool architecture, are more visible in the literature, but still addressed only in a minority of reviews. Artificial intelligence is poised to bring significant benefits to a wide range of applications in cancer control, but more thorough and standardized evaluations and reporting of model fairness are required to build the evidence base for AI-based tool design for cancer and to ensure that these emerging technologies promote equitable healthcare.

A method for structuring complex clinical knowledge and its representational formalisms to support composite knowledge interoperability in healthcare.

INTRODUCTION: The use and interoperability of clinical knowledge starts with the quality of the formalism utilized to express medical expertise. However, a crucial challenge is that existing formalisms are often suboptimal, lacking the fidelity to represent complex knowledge thoroughly and concisely. Often this leads to difficulties when seeking to unambiguously capture, share, and implement the knowledge for care improvement in clinical information systems used by providers and patients. OBJECTIVES: To provide a systematic method to address some of the complexities of knowledge composition and interoperability related to standards-based representational formalisms of medical knowledge. METHODS: Several cross-industry (Healthcare, Linguistics, System Engineering, Standards Development, and Knowledge Engineering) frameworks were synthesized into a proposed reference knowledge framework. The framework utilizes IEEE 42010, the MetaObject Facility, the Semantic Triangle, an Ontology Framework, and the Domain and Comprehensibility Appropriateness criteria. The steps taken were: 1) identify foundational cross-industry frameworks, 2) select architecture description method, 3) define life cycle viewpoints, 4) define representation and knowledge viewpoints, 5) define relationships between neighboring viewpoints, and 6) establish characteristic definitions of the relationships between components. System engineering principles applied included separation of concerns, cohesion, and loose coupling. RESULTS: A "Multilayer Metamodel for Representation and Knowledge" (M*R/K) reference framework was defined. It provides a standard vocabulary for organizing and articulating medical knowledge curation perspectives, concepts, and relationships across the artifacts created during the life cycle of language creation, authoring medical knowledge, and knowledge implementation in clinical information systems such as electronic health records (EHR). CONCLUSION: M*R/K provides a systematic means to address some of the complexities of knowledge composition and interoperability related to medical knowledge representations used in diverse standards. The framework may be used to guide the development, assessment, and coordinated use of knowledge representation formalisms. M*R/K could promote the alignment and aggregated use of distinct domain-specific languages in composite knowledge artifacts such as clinical practice guidelines (CPGs).

Evaluation of Discrepancies Among National Library of Medicine (NLM) Value Set Authority Center (VSAC) ICD-10-CM Value Sets: Case Study for Diagnoses of Common Chronic Conditions, Implications, and Potential Solutions.

The National Library of Medicine (NLM)'s Value Set Authority Center (VSAC) is a crowd-sourced repository with a potential for substantial discrepancy among value sets for the same clinical concepts. To characterize this potential problem, we identified the most common chronic conditions affecting US adults and assessed for discrepancy among VSAC ICD-10-CM value sets for these conditions. An analysis of 32 value sets for 12 conditions identified that a median of 45% of codes for a given condition were potentially problematic (included in at least one, but not all, theoretically equivalent value sets). These problematic codes were used to document clinical care for potentially over 20 million patients in a data warehouse of approximately 150 million US adults. Users of VSAC diagnosis value sets should be cognizant of the prevalence of these discrepancies and take proactive steps to mitigate their impact. Further research is warranted to characterize and address this issue.

The SIMPLE Architectural Pattern for Integrating Patient-Facing Apps into Clinical Workflows: Desiderata and Application for Lung Cancer Screening.

In December 2022, regulations from the U.S. Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT came into effect that require electronic health record (EHR) systems to accept the connection of any patient-facing digital health app using the SMART on FHIR standard. However, little has been reported with regard to architectural patterns that can be reused to take advantage of this industry development and integrate patient-facing apps into clinical workflows. To address this need, we propose SIMPLE, short for Standards-based Implementation Maximizing Portability Leveraging the EHR. The SIMPLE architectural pattern was designed to meet several key desiderata: do not require patients to install new software; do not retain patient data outside of the EHR; leverage EHRs' existing personal health record (PHR) capabilities to optimize user experience; and maximize portability. Using this pattern, an application for lung cancer screening known as MyLungHealth has been designed and is undergoing iterative user-centered enhancement.

Electronic Health Record-Integrated Clinical Decision Support for Clinicians Serving Populations Facing Health Care Disparities: Literature Review.

OBJECTIVES: To review current studies about designing and implementing clinician-facing clinical decision support (CDS) integrated or interoperable with an electronic health record (EHR) to improve health care for populations facing disparities. METHODS: We searched PubMed to identify studies published between January 1, 2011 and October 22, 2021 about clinician-facing CDS integrated or interoperable with an EHR. We screened abstracts and titles and extracted study data from articles using a protocol developed by team consensus. Extracted data included patient population characteristics, clinical specialty, setting, EHR, clinical problem, CDS type, reported user-centered design, implementation strategies, and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 28 studies (36 articles) included. Most studies were performed at safety net institutions (14 studies) or Indian Health Service sites (6 studies). CDS tools were implemented in primary care outpatient settings in 24 studies (86%) for screening or treatment. CDS included point-of-care alerts (93%), order facilitators (46%), workflow support (39%), relevant information display (36%), expert systems (11%), and medication dosing support (7%). Successful outcomes were reported in 19 of 26 studies that reported outcomes (73%). User-centered design was reported during CDS planning (39%), development (32%), and implementation phase (25%). Most frequent implementation strategies were education (89%) and consensus facilitation (50%). CONCLUSIONS: CDS tools may improve health equity and outcomes for patients who face disparities. The present review underscores the need for high-quality analyses of CDS-associated health outcomes, reporting of user-centered design and implementation strategies used in low-resource settings, and methods to disseminate CDS created to improve health equity.