Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31419829›Full record

ReviewYearbook of medical informatics2019

Artificial Intelligence in Health: New Opportunities, Challenges, and Practical Implications.

Annie Y S Lau, Pascal Staccini, Section Editors for the IMIA Yearbook Section on Education and Consumer Health Informatics

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Yearbook of medical informatics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. [Computer-assisted skin cancer diagnosis : Is it time for artificial intelligence in clinical practice?]Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2020
    Review
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

3 authors.

Annie Y S LauCentre for Health Informatics, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Australia.
Pascal StacciniIRIS Department, URE RETINES, Faculté de Médecine, Université Côte d'Azur, France.
Section Editors for the IMIA Yearbook Section on Education and Consumer Health Informatics

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo summarise the state of the art during the year 2018 in consumer health informatics and education, with a special emphasis on the special topic of the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) Yearbook for 2019: "Artificial intelligence in health: new opportunities, challenges, and practical implications".

methodsWe conducted a systematic search of articles published in PubMed using a predefined set of queries that identified 99 potential articles for review. These articles were screened according to topic relevance and 14 were selected for consideration as best paper candidates. The 14 papers were then presented to a panel of international experts for full paper review and scoring. Three papers that received the highest score were discussed in a consensus meeting and were agreed upon as best papers on artificial intelligence in health for patients and consumers in the year 2018.

resultsOnly a small number of 2018 papers reported Artificial Intelligence (AI) research for patients and consumers. No studies were found on AI applications designed specifically for patients or consumers, nor were there studies that elicited patient and consumer input on AI. Currently, the most common use of AI for patients and consumers lies in secondary analysis of social media data (e.g., online discussion forums). In particular, the three best papers shared a common methodology of using data-driven algorithms (such as text mining, topic modelling, Latent Dirichlet allocation modelling), combined with insight-led approaches (e.g., visualisation, qualitative analysis and manual review), to uncover patient and consumer experiences of health and illness in online communities.

conclusionsWhile discussion remains active on how AI could 'revolutionise' healthcare delivery, there is a lack of direction and evidence on how AI could actually benefit patients and consumers. Perhaps instead of primarily focusing on data and algorithms, researchers should engage with patients and consumers early in the AI research agenda to ensure we are indeed asking the right questions, and that important use cases and critical contexts are identified together with patients and consumers. Without a clear understanding on why patients and consumers need AI in the first place, or how AI could support individuals with their healthcare needs, it is difficult to imagine the kinds of AI applications that would have meaningful and sustainable impact on individual daily lives.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceConsumer Health InformaticsBibliometricsBiomedical ResearchData MiningHumansPatient CompliancePatient Generated Health DataPrecision Medicine

Identifiers

PMID31419829
PMCPMC6697520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.