Use of artificial intelligence in critical care: opportunities and obstacles.

BACKGROUND: Perhaps nowhere else in the healthcare system than in the intensive care unit environment are the challenges to create useful models with direct time-critical clinical applications more relevant and the obstacles to achieving those goals more massive. Machine learning-based artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to define states and predict future events are commonplace activities of modern life. However, their penetration into acute care medicine has been slow, stuttering and uneven. Major obstacles to widespread effective application of AI approaches to the real-time care of the critically ill patient exist and need to be addressed. MAIN BODY: Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) in acute and critical care environments support clinicians, not replace them at the bedside. As will be discussed in this review, the reasons are many and include the immaturity of AI-based systems to have situational awareness, the fundamental bias in many large databases that do not reflect the target population of patient being treated making fairness an important issue to address and technical barriers to the timely access to valid data and its display in a fashion useful for clinical workflow. The inherent "black-box" nature of many predictive algorithms and CDSS makes trustworthiness and acceptance by the medical community difficult. Logistically, collating and curating in real-time multidimensional data streams of various sources needed to inform the algorithms and ultimately display relevant clinical decisions support format that adapt to individual patient responses and signatures represent the efferent limb of these systems and is often ignored during initial validation efforts. Similarly, legal and commercial barriers to the access to many existing clinical databases limit studies to address fairness and generalizability of predictive models and management tools. CONCLUSIONS: AI-based CDSS are evolving and are here to stay. It is our obligation to be good shepherds of their use and further development.

Predicting pressure injury risk in hospitalised patients using machine learning with electronic health records: a US multilevel cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To predict the risk of hospital-acquired pressure injury using machine learning compared with standard care. DESIGN: We obtained electronic health records (EHRs) to structure a multilevel cohort of hospitalised patients at risk for pressure injury and then calibrate a machine learning model to predict future pressure injury risk. Optimisation methods combined with multilevel logistic regression were used to develop a predictive algorithm of patient-specific shifts in risk over time. Machine learning methods were tested, including random forests, to identify predictive features for the algorithm. We reported the results of the regression approach as well as the area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve for predictive models. SETTING: Hospitalised inpatients. PARTICIPANTS: EHRs of 35 001 hospitalisations over 5 years across 2 academic hospitals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Longitudinal shifts in pressure injury risk. RESULTS: The predictive algorithm with features generated by machine learning achieved significantly improved prediction of pressure injury risk (p<0.001) with an area under the ROC curve of 0.72; whereas standard care only achieved an area under the ROC curve of 0.52. At a specificity of 0.50, the predictive algorithm achieved a sensitivity of 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: These data could help hospitals conserve resources within a critical period of patient vulnerability of hospital-acquired pressure injury which is not reimbursed by US Medicare; thus, conserving between 30 000 and 90 000 labour-hours per year in an average 500-bed hospital. Hospitals can use this predictive algorithm to initiate a quality improvement programme for pressure injury prevention and further customise the algorithm to patient-specific variation by facility.

Evaluating Algorithmic Bias in 30-Day Hospital Readmission Models: Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of predictive algorithms in health care comes with the potential for algorithmic bias, which could exacerbate existing disparities. Fairness metrics have been proposed to measure algorithmic bias, but their application to real-world tasks is limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the algorithmic bias associated with the application of common 30-day hospital readmission models and assess the usefulness and interpretability of selected fairness metrics. METHODS: We used 10.6 million adult inpatient discharges from Maryland and Florida from 2016 to 2019 in this retrospective study. Models predicting 30-day hospital readmissions were evaluated: LACE Index, modified HOSPITAL score, and modified Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) readmission measure, which were applied as-is (using existing coefficients) and retrained (recalibrated with 50% of the data). Predictive performances and bias measures were evaluated for all, between Black and White populations, and between low- and other-income groups. Bias measures included the parity of false negative rate (FNR), false positive rate (FPR), 0-1 loss, and generalized entropy index. Racial bias represented by FNR and FPR differences was stratified to explore shifts in algorithmic bias in different populations. RESULTS: The retrained CMS model demonstrated the best predictive performance (area under the curve: 0.74 in Maryland and 0.68-0.70 in Florida), and the modified HOSPITAL score demonstrated the best calibration (Brier score: 0.16-0.19 in Maryland and 0.19-0.21 in Florida). Calibration was better in White (compared to Black) populations and other-income (compared to low-income) groups, and the area under the curve was higher or similar in the Black (compared to White) populations. The retrained CMS and modified HOSPITAL score had the lowest racial and income bias in Maryland. In Florida, both of these models overall had the lowest income bias and the modified HOSPITAL score showed the lowest racial bias. In both states, the White and higher-income populations showed a higher FNR, while the Black and low-income populations resulted in a higher FPR and a higher 0-1 loss. When stratified by hospital and population composition, these models demonstrated heterogeneous algorithmic bias in different contexts and populations. CONCLUSIONS: Caution must be taken when interpreting fairness measures' face value. A higher FNR or FPR could potentially reflect missed opportunities or wasted resources, but these measures could also reflect health care use patterns and gaps in care. Simply relying on the statistical notions of bias could obscure or underplay the causes of health disparity. The imperfect health data, analytic frameworks, and the underlying health systems must be carefully considered. Fairness measures can serve as a useful routine assessment to detect disparate model performances but are insufficient to inform mechanisms or policy changes. However, such an assessment is an important first step toward data-driven improvement to address existing health disparities.

Large language models for science and medicine.

Large language models (LLMs) are a type of machine learning model that learn statistical patterns over text, such as predicting the next words in a sequence of text. Both general purpose and task-specific LLMs have demonstrated potential across diverse applications. Science and medicine have many data types that are highly suitable for LLMs, such as scientific texts (publications, patents and textbooks), electronic medical records, large databases of DNA and protein sequences and chemical compounds. Carefully validated systems that can understand and reason across all these modalities may maximize benefits. Despite the inevitable limitations and caveats of any new technology and some uncertainties specific to LLMs, LLMs have the potential to be transformative in science and medicine.

A Nationwide Network of Health AI Assurance Laboratories.

Importance: Given the importance of rigorous development and evaluation standards needed of artificial intelligence (AI) models used in health care, nationwide accepted procedures to provide assurance that the use of AI is fair, appropriate, valid, effective, and safe are urgently needed. Observations: While there are several efforts to develop standards and best practices to evaluate AI, there is a gap between having such guidance and the application of such guidance to both existing and new AI models being developed. As of now, there is no publicly available, nationwide mechanism that enables objective evaluation and ongoing assessment of the consequences of using health AI models in clinical care settings. Conclusion and Relevance: The need to create a public-private partnership to support a nationwide health AI assurance labs network is outlined here. In this network, community best practices could be applied for testing health AI models to produce reports on their performance that can be widely shared for managing the lifecycle of AI models over time and across populations and sites where these models are deployed.

A Random Forest Genomic Classifier for Tumor Agnostic Prediction of Response to Anti-PD1 Immunotherapy.

Tumor mutational burden (TMB), a surrogate for tumor neoepitope burden, is used as a pan-tumor biomarker to identify patients who may benefit from anti-program cell death 1 (PD1) immunotherapy, but it is an imperfect biomarker. Multiple additional genomic characteristics are associated with anti-PD1 responses, but the combined predictive value of these features and the added informativeness of each respective feature remains unknown. We evaluated whether machine learning (ML) approaches using proposed determinants of anti-PD1 response derived from whole exome sequencing (WES) could improve prediction of anti-PD1 responders over TMB alone. Random forest classifiers were trained on publicly available anti-PD1 data (n = 104), and subsequently tested on an independent anti-PD1 cohort (n = 69). Both the training and test datasets included a range of cancer types such as non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), melanoma, and smaller numbers of patients from other tumor types. Features used include summaries such as TMB and number of frameshift mutations, as well as more gene-level features such as counts of mutations associated with immune checkpoint response and resistance. Both ML algorithms demonstrated area under the receiver-operator curves (AUC) that exceeded TMB alone (AUC 0.63 "human-guided," 0.64 "cluster," and 0.58 TMB alone). Mutations within oncogenes disproportionately modulate anti-PD1 responses relative to their overall contribution to tumor neoepitope burden. The use of a ML algorithm evaluating multiple proposed genomic determinants of anti-PD1 responses modestly improves performance over TMB alone, highlighting the need to integrate other biomarkers to further improve model performance.

Medicine 2032: The future of cardiovascular disease prevention with machine learning and digital health technology.

Machine learning (ML) refers to computational algorithms that iteratively improve their ability to recognize patterns in data. The digitization of our healthcare infrastructure is generating an abundance of data from electronic health records, imaging, wearables, and sensors that can be analyzed by ML algorithms to generate personalized risk assessments and promote guideline-directed medical management. ML's strength in generating insights from complex medical data to guide clinical decisions must be balanced with the potential to adversely affect patient privacy, safety, health equity, and clinical interpretability. This review provides a primer on key advances in ML for cardiovascular disease prevention and how they may impact clinical practice.

Research gaps and opportunities in precision nutrition: an NIH workshop report.

Precision nutrition is an emerging concept that aims to develop nutrition recommendations tailored to different people's circumstances and biological characteristics. Responses to dietary change and the resulting health outcomes from consuming different diets may vary significantly between people based on interactions between their genetic backgrounds, physiology, microbiome, underlying health status, behaviors, social influences, and environmental exposures. On 11-12 January 2021, the National Institutes of Health convened a workshop entitled "Precision Nutrition: Research Gaps and Opportunities" to bring together experts to discuss the issues involved in better understanding and addressing precision nutrition. The workshop proceeded in 3 parts: part I covered many aspects of genetics and physiology that mediate the links between nutrient intake and health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer disease, and cancer; part II reviewed potential contributors to interindividual variability in dietary exposures and responses such as baseline nutritional status, circadian rhythm/sleep, environmental exposures, sensory properties of food, stress, inflammation, and the social determinants of health; part III presented the need for systems approaches, with new methods and technologies that can facilitate the study and implementation of precision nutrition, and workforce development needed to create a new generation of researchers. The workshop concluded that much research will be needed before more precise nutrition recommendations can be achieved. This includes better understanding and accounting for variables such as age, sex, ethnicity, medical history, genetics, and social and environmental factors. The advent of new methods and technologies and the availability of considerably more data bring tremendous opportunity. However, the field must proceed with appropriate levels of caution and make sure the factors listed above are all considered, and systems approaches and methods are incorporated. It will be important to develop and train an expanded workforce with the goal of reducing health disparities and improving precision nutritional advice for all Americans.

Prospective, multi-site study of patient outcomes after implementation of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system for sepsis.

Early recognition and treatment of sepsis are linked to improved patient outcomes. Machine learning-based early warning systems may reduce the time to recognition, but few systems have undergone clinical evaluation. In this prospective, multi-site cohort study, we examined the association between patient outcomes and provider interaction with a deployed sepsis alert system called the Targeted Real-time Early Warning System (TREWS). During the study, 590,736 patients were monitored by TREWS across five hospitals. We focused our analysis on 6,877 patients with sepsis who were identified by the alert before initiation of antibiotic therapy. Adjusting for patient presentation and severity, patients in this group whose alert was confirmed by a provider within 3 h of the alert had a reduced in-hospital mortality rate (3.3%, confidence interval (CI) 1.7, 5.1%, adjusted absolute reduction, and 18.7%, CI 9.4, 27.0%, adjusted relative reduction), organ failure and length of stay compared with patients whose alert was not confirmed by a provider within 3 h. Improvements in mortality rate (4.5%, CI 0.8, 8.3%, adjusted absolute reduction) and organ failure were larger among those patients who were additionally flagged as high risk. Our findings indicate that early warning systems have the potential to identify sepsis patients early and improve patient outcomes and that sepsis patients who would benefit the most from early treatment can be identified and prioritized at the time of the alert.

Factors driving provider adoption of the TREWS machine learning-based early warning system and its effects on sepsis treatment timing.

Machine learning-based clinical decision support tools for sepsis create opportunities to identify at-risk patients and initiate treatments at early time points, which is critical for improving sepsis outcomes. In view of the increasing use of such systems, better understanding of how they are adopted and used by healthcare providers is needed. Here, we analyzed provider interactions with a sepsis early detection tool (Targeted Real-time Early Warning System), which was deployed at five hospitals over a 2-year period. Among 9,805 retrospectively identified sepsis cases, the early detection tool achieved high sensitivity (82% of sepsis cases were identified) and a high rate of adoption: 89% of all alerts by the system were evaluated by a physician or advanced practice provider and 38% of evaluated alerts were confirmed by a provider. Adjusting for patient presentation and severity, patients with sepsis whose alert was confirmed by a provider within 3 h had a 1.85-h (95% CI 1.66-2.00) reduction in median time to first antibiotic order compared to patients with sepsis whose alert was either dismissed, confirmed more than 3 h after the alert or never addressed in the system. Finally, we found that emergency department providers and providers who had previous interactions with an alert were more likely to interact with alerts, as well as to confirm alerts on retrospectively identified patients with sepsis. Beyond efforts to improve the performance of early warning systems, efforts to improve adoption are essential to their clinical impact and should focus on understanding providers' knowledge of, experience with and attitudes toward such systems.

Human-machine teaming is key to AI adoption: clinicians' experiences with a deployed machine learning system.

While a growing number of machine learning (ML) systems have been deployed in clinical settings with the promise of improving patient care, many have struggled to gain adoption and realize this promise. Based on a qualitative analysis of coded interviews with clinicians who use an ML-based system for sepsis, we found that, rather than viewing the system as a surrogate for their clinical judgment, clinicians perceived themselves as partnering with the technology. Our findings suggest that, even without a deep understanding of machine learning, clinicians can build trust with an ML system through experience, expert endorsement and validation, and systems designed to accommodate clinicians' autonomy and support them across their entire workflow.

Reporting guideline for the early-stage clinical evaluation of decision support systems driven by artificial intelligence: DECIDE-AI.

A growing number of artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support systems are showing promising performance in preclinical, in silico evaluation, but few have yet demonstrated real benefit to patient care. Early-stage clinical evaluation is important to assess an AI system's actual clinical performance at small scale, ensure its safety, evaluate the human factors surrounding its use and pave the way to further large-scale trials. However, the reporting of these early studies remains inadequate. The present statement provides a multi-stakeholder, consensus-based reporting guideline for the Developmental and Exploratory Clinical Investigations of DEcision support systems driven by Artificial Intelligence (DECIDE-AI). We conducted a two-round, modified Delphi process to collect and analyze expert opinion on the reporting of early clinical evaluation of AI systems. Experts were recruited from 20 pre-defined stakeholder categories. The final composition and wording of the guideline was determined at a virtual consensus meeting. The checklist and the Explanation & Elaboration (E&E) sections were refined based on feedback from a qualitative evaluation process. In total, 123 experts participated in the first round of Delphi, 138 in the second round, 16 in the consensus meeting and 16 in the qualitative evaluation. The DECIDE-AI reporting guideline comprises 17 AI-specific reporting items (made of 28 subitems) and ten generic reporting items, with an E&E paragraph provided for each. Through consultation and consensus with a range of stakeholders, we developed a guideline comprising key items that should be reported in early-stage clinical studies of AI-based decision support systems in healthcare. By providing an actionable checklist of minimal reporting items, the DECIDE-AI guideline will facilitate the appraisal of these studies and replicability of their findings.

A bias evaluation checklist for predictive models and its pilot application for 30-day hospital readmission models.

OBJECTIVE: Health care providers increasingly rely upon predictive algorithms when making important treatment decisions, however, evidence indicates that these tools can lead to inequitable outcomes across racial and socio-economic groups. In this study, we introduce a bias evaluation checklist that allows model developers and health care providers a means to systematically appraise a model's potential to introduce bias. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our methods include developing a bias evaluation checklist, a scoping literature review to identify 30-day hospital readmission prediction models, and assessing the selected models using the checklist. RESULTS: We selected 4 models for evaluation: LACE, HOSPITAL, Johns Hopkins ACG, and HATRIX. Our assessment identified critical ways in which these algorithms can perpetuate health care inequalities. We found that LACE and HOSPITAL have the greatest potential for introducing bias, Johns Hopkins ACG has the most areas of uncertainty, and HATRIX has the fewest causes for concern. DISCUSSION: Our approach gives model developers and health care providers a practical and systematic method for evaluating bias in predictive models. Traditional bias identification methods do not elucidate sources of bias and are thus insufficient for mitigation efforts. With our checklist, bias can be addressed and eliminated before a model is fully developed or deployed. CONCLUSION: The potential for algorithms to perpetuate biased outcomes is not isolated to readmission prediction models; rather, we believe our results have implications for predictive models across health care. We offer a systematic method for evaluating potential bias with sufficient flexibility to be utilized across models and applications.

A prospective birth cohort study of maternal prenatal cigarette smoking assessed by self-report and biomarkers on childhood risk of overweight or obesity.

Background: Most studies on the association of in utero exposure to cigarette smoking and childhood overweight or obesity (OWO) were based on maternal self-reported smoking status, and few were based on objective biomarkers. The concordance of self-report smoking, and maternal and cord blood biomarkers of cigarette smoking as well as their effects on children's long-term risk of overweight and obesity are unclear. Methods: In this study, we analyzed data from 2351 mother-child pairs in the Boston Birth Cohort, a sample of US predominantly Black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) that enrolled children at birth and followed prospectively up to age 18 years. In utero smoking exposure was measured by maternal self-report and by maternal and cord plasma biomarkers of smoking: cotinine and hydroxycotinine. We assessed the individual and joint associations of each smoking exposure measure and maternal OWO with childhood OWO using multinomial logistic regressions. We used nested logistic regressions to investigate the childhood OWO prediction performance when adding maternal and cord plasma biomarkers as input covariates on top of self-reported data. Results: Our results demonstrated that in utero cigarette smoking exposure defined by self-report and by maternal or cord metabolites was consistently associated with increased risk of long-term child OWO. Children with cord hydroxycotinine in the fourth quartile (vs. first quartile) had 1.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-2.66) times the odds for overweight and 1.57 (95% CI 1.05-2.36) times the odds for obesity. The combined effect of maternal OWO and smoking on offspring risk of obesity is 3.66 (95% CI 2.37-5.67) if using self-reported smoking. Adding maternal and cord plasma biomarker information to self-reported data improved the prediction accuracy of long-term child OWO risk. Conclusions: This longitudinal birth cohort study of US BIPOC underscored the role of maternal smoking as an obesogen for offspring OWO risk. Our findings call for public health intervention strategies to focus on maternal smoking - as a highly modifiable target, including smoking cessation and countermeasures (such as optimal nutrition) that may alleviate the increasing obesity burden in the United States and globally.

Digital Endpoints: Definition, Benefits, and Current Barriers in Accelerating Development and Adoption.

The assessment of health and disease requires a set of criteria to define health status and progression. These health measures are referred to as "endpoints." A "digital endpoint" is defined by its use of sensor-generated data often collected outside of a clinical setting such as in a patient's free-living environment. Applicable sensors exist in an array of devices and can be applied in a diverse set of contexts. For example, a smartphone's microphone might be used to diagnose or predict mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease or a wrist-worn activity monitor (such as those found in smartwatches) may be used to measure a drug's effect on the nocturnal activity of patients with sickle cell disease. Digital endpoints are generating considerable excitement because they permit a more authentic assessment of the patient's experience, reveal formerly untold realities of disease burden, and can cut drug discovery costs in half. However, before these benefits can be realized, effort must be applied not only to the technical creation of digital endpoints but also to the environment that allows for their development and application. The future of digital endpoints rests on meaningful interdisciplinary collaboration, sufficient evidence that digital endpoints can realize their promise, and the development of an ecosystem in which the vast quantities of data that digital endpoints generate can be analyzed. The fundamental nature of health care is changing. With coronavirus disease 2019 serving as a catalyst, there has been a rapid expansion of home care models, telehealth, and remote patient monitoring. The increasing adoption of these health-care innovations will expedite the requirement for a digital characterization of clinical status as current assessment tools often rely upon direct interaction with patients and thus are not fit for purpose to be administered remotely. With the ubiquity of relatively inexpensive sensors, digital endpoints are positioned to drive this consequential change. It is therefore not surprising that regulators, physicians, researchers, and consultants have each offered their assessment of these novel tools. However, as we further describe later, the broad adoption of digital endpoints will require a cooperative effort. In this article, we present an analysis of the current state of digital endpoints. We also attempt to unify the perspectives of the parties involved in the development and deployment of these tools. We conclude with an interdependent list of challenges that must be collaboratively addressed before these endpoints are widely adopted.

Will Artificial Intelligence Replace the Movement Disorders Specialist for Diagnosing and Managing Parkinson's Disease?

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to help diagnose and manage disease is of increasing interest to researchers and clinicians. Volumes of health data are generated from smartphones and ubiquitous inexpensive sensors. By using these data, AI can offer otherwise unobtainable insights about disease burden and patient status in a free-living environment. Moreover, from clinical datasets AI can improve patient symptom monitoring and global epidemiologic efforts. While these applications are exciting, it is necessary to examine both the utility and limitations of these novel analytic methods. The most promising uses of AI remain aspirational. For example, defining the molecular subtypes of Parkinson's disease will be assisted by future applications of AI to relevant datasets. This will allow clinicians to match patients to molecular therapies and will thus help launch precision medicine. Until AI proves its potential in pushing the frontier of precision medicine, its utility will primarily remain in individualized monitoring, complementing but not replacing movement disorders specialists.

Development and Validation of ARC, a Model for Anticipating Acute Respiratory Failure in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate factors predictive of clinical progression among coronavirus disease 2019 patients following admission, and whether continuous, automated assessments of patient status may contribute to optimal monitoring and management. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort for algorithm training, testing, and validation. SETTING: Eight hospitals across two geographically distinct regions. PATIENTS: Two-thousand fifteen hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019-positive patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Anticipating Respiratory failure in Coronavirus disease (ARC), a clinically interpretable, continuously monitoring prognostic model of acute respiratory failure in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients, was developed and validated. An analysis of the most important clinical predictors aligns with key risk factors identified by other investigators but contributes new insights regarding the time at which key factors first begin to exhibit aberrency and distinguishes features predictive of acute respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 versus pneumonia caused by other types of infection. Departing from prior work, ARC was designed to update continuously over time as new observations (vitals and laboratory test results) are recorded in the electronic health record. Validation against data from two geographically distinct health systems showed that the proposed model achieved 75% specificity and 77% sensitivity and predicted acute respiratory failure at a median time of 32 hours prior to onset. Over 80% of true-positive alerts occurred in non-ICU settings. CONCLUSIONS: Patients admitted to non-ICU environments with coronavirus disease 2019 are at ongoing risk of clinical progression to severe disease, yet it is challenging to anticipate which patients will develop acute respiratory failure. A continuously monitoring prognostic model has potential to facilitate anticipatory rather than reactive approaches to escalation of care (e.g., earlier initiation of treatments for severe disease or structured monitoring and therapeutic interventions for high-risk patients).