Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35857865›Full record

ReviewArthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.)2022

Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning for Rheumatologists.

Christopher McMaster, Alix Bird, David F L Liew, Russell R Buchanan, Claire E Owen, Wendy W Chapman, Douglas E V Pires

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Large language models and rheumatology: are we there yet?Rheumatology advances in practice · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Christopher McMasterDepartment of Rheumatology and Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Austin Health, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia, and Centre for Digital Transformation of Health and School of Computing and Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2432-5451
Alix BirdAustralian Institute for Machine Learning, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8676-0822
David F L LiewDepartment of Rheumatology and Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Austin Health, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Austin Health, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8451-8883
Russell R BuchananDepartment of Rheumatology, Austin Health, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.
Claire E OwenDepartment of Rheumatology, Austin Health, and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2694-5411
Wendy W ChapmanCentre for Digital Transformation of Health, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8702-4483
Douglas E V PiresCentre for Digital Transformation of Health and School of Computing and Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3004-2119

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep learning has emerged as the leading method in machine learning, spawning a rapidly growing field of academic research and commercial applications across medicine. Deep learning could have particular relevance to rheumatology if correctly utilized. The greatest benefits of deep learning methods are seen with unstructured data frequently found in rheumatology, such as images and text, where traditional machine learning methods have struggled to unlock the trove of information held within these data formats. The basis for this success comes from the ability of deep learning to learn the structure of the underlying data. It is no surprise that the first areas of medicine that have started to experience impact from deep learning heavily rely on interpreting visual data, such as triaging radiology workflows and computer-assisted colonoscopy. Applications in rheumatology are beginning to emerge, with recent successes in areas as diverse as detecting joint erosions on plain radiography, predicting future rheumatoid arthritis disease activity, and identifying halo sign on temporal artery ultrasound. Given the important role deep learning methods are likely to play in the future of rheumatology, it is imperative that rheumatologists understand the methods and assumptions that underlie the deep learning algorithms in widespread use today, their limitations and the landscape of deep learning research that will inform algorithm development, and clinical decision support tools of the future. The best applications of deep learning in rheumatology must be informed by the clinical experience of rheumatologists, so that algorithms can be developed to tackle the most relevant clinical problems.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDeep LearningAlgorithmsHumansMachine LearningRheumatologists

Identifiers

PMID35857865
PMCPMC10092842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.