Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30964437›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2019

The Future of Health Care: Protocol for Measuring the Potential of Task Automation Grounded in the National Health Service Primary Care System.

Matthew Willis, Paul Duckworth, Angela Coulter, Eric T Meyer, Michael Osborne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. How Can Artificial Intelligence Make Medicine More Preemptive?Journal of medical Internet research · 2020
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matthew WillisOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9120-7319
Paul DuckworthMachine Learning Research Group, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9052-6919
Angela CoulterHealth Services Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6308-8375
Eric T MeyerOxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1998-7162
Michael OsborneMachine Learning Research Group, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1959-012X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent advances in technology have reopened an old debate on which sectors will be most affected by automation. This debate is ill served by the current lack of detailed data on the exact capabilities of new machines and how they are influencing work. Although recent debates about the future of jobs have focused on whether they are at risk of automation, our research focuses on a more fine-grained and transparent method to model task automation and specifically focus on the domain of primary health care.

objectiveThis protocol describes a new wave of intelligent automation, focusing on the specific pressures faced by primary care within the National Health Service (NHS) in England. These pressures include staff shortages, increased service demand, and reduced budgets. A critical part of the problem we propose to address is a formal framework for measuring automation, which is lacking in the literature. The health care domain offers a further challenge in measuring automation because of a general lack of detailed, health care-specific occupation and task observational data to provide good insights on this misunderstood topic.

methodsThis project utilizes a multimethod research design comprising two phases: a qualitative observational phase and a quantitative data analysis phase; each phase addresses one of the two project aims. Our first aim is to address the lack of task data by collecting high-quality, detailed task-specific data from UK primary health care practices. This phase employs ethnography, observation, interviews, document collection, and focus groups. The second aim is to propose a formal machine learning approach for probabilistic inference of task- and occupation-level automation to gain valuable insights. Sensitivity analysis is then used to present the occupational attributes that increase/decrease automatability most, which is vital for establishing effective training and staffing policy.

resultsOur detailed fieldwork includes observing and documenting 16 unique occupations and performing over 130 tasks across six primary care centers. Preliminary results on the current state of automation and the potential for further automation in primary care are discussed. Our initial findings are that tasks are often shared amongst staff and can include convoluted workflows that often vary between practices. The single most used technology in primary health care is the desktop computer. In addition, we have conducted a large-scale survey of over 156 machine learning and robotics experts to assess what tasks are susceptible to automation, given the state-of-the-art technology available today. Further results and detailed analysis will be published toward the end of the project in early 2019.

conclusionsWe believe our analysis will identify many tasks currently performed manually within primary care that can be automated using currently available technology. Given the proper implementation of such automating technologies, we expect considerable staff resources to be saved, alleviating some pressures on the NHS primary care staff. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11232.

Indexed as

automationinterdisciplinary researchqualitative researchsupervised machine learningtask performance and analysis

Identifiers

PMID30964437
PMCPMC6477572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.