Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36457495›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Data-driven support to decision-making in molecular tumour boards for lymphoma: A design science approach.

Núria Rodríguez Ruiz, Sulaf Abd Own, Karin Ekström Smedby, Sandra Eloranta, Sabine Koch, Tove Wästerlid, Aleksandra Krstic, Magnus Boman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. An overview and a roadmap for artificial intelligence in hematology and oncology.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Núria Rodríguez RuizDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics (LIME), Health Informatics Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sulaf Abd OwnDepartment of Medicine Solna, Clinical Epidemiology Division, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karin Ekström SmedbyDepartment of Medicine Solna, Clinical Epidemiology Division, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sandra ElorantaDepartment of Medicine Solna, Clinical Epidemiology Division, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Sabine KochDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics (LIME), Health Informatics Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Tove WästerlidDepartment of Medicine Solna, Clinical Epidemiology Division, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Aleksandra KrsticCenter for Hematology and Regenerative Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Magnus BomanDepartment of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics (LIME), Health Informatics Centre, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SEKarolinska University Hospital · SEKTH Royal Institute of Technology · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The increasing amount of molecular data and knowledge about genomic alterations from next-generation sequencing processes together allow for a greater understanding of individual patients, thereby advancing precision medicine. Molecular tumour boards feature multidisciplinary teams of clinical experts who meet to discuss complex individual cancer cases. Preparing the meetings is a manual and time-consuming process. Purpose: To design a clinical decision support system to improve the multimodal data interpretation in molecular tumour board meetings for lymphoma patients at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. We investigated user needs and system requirements, explored the employment of artificial intelligence, and evaluated the proposed design with primary stakeholders. Methods: Design science methodology was used to form and evaluate the proposed artefact. Requirements elicitation was done through a scoping review followed by five semi-structured interviews. We used UML Use Case diagrams to model user interaction and UML Activity diagrams to inform the proposed flow of control in the system. Additionally, we modelled the current and future workflow for MTB meetings and its proposed machine learning pipeline. Interactive sessions with end-users validated the initial requirements based on a fictive patient scenario which helped further refine the system. Results: The analysis showed that an interactive secure Web-based information system supporting the preparation of the meeting, multidisciplinary discussions, and clinical decision-making could address the identified requirements. Integrating artificial intelligence Impact: Our work is of methodological importance in that using artificial intelligence for molecular tumour boards is novel. We provide a consolidated proof-of-concept system that could support the end-to-end clinical decision-making process and positively and immediately impact patients. Conclusion: Augmenting a digital decision support system for molecular tumour boards with retrospective patient material is promising. This generates realistic and constructive material for human learning, and also digital data for continual learning by data-driven artificial intelligence approaches. The latter makes the future system adaptable to human bias, improving adequacy and decision quality over time and over tasks, while building and maintaining a digital log.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceclinical decision support systemlymphomamolecular tumour boardmultimodal datanext-generation sequencingprecision medicine

Identifiers

PMID36457495
PMCPMC9705761
OpenAlexW4309108678

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.