Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38023280›Full record

ArticleVeterinary world2023

Artificial intelligence feasibility in veterinary medicine: A systematic review.

Fayssal Bouchemla, Sergey Vladimirovich Akchurin, Irina Vladimirovna Akchurina, Georgiy Petrovitch Dyulger, Evgenia Sergeevna Latynina, Anastasia Vladimirovna Grecheneva

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Veterinary world, 2023. 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
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fayssal BouchemlaDepartment of Animal Disease, Veterinarian and Sanitarian Expertise, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Vavilov Saratov State University of Genetic, Biotechnology and Engineering Saratov, Russia.
Sergey Vladimirovich AkchurinDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Russian State Agrarian University- Moscow Agricultural Academy named after K.A. Timiryazev, 49, str. Timiryazevskaya, Moscow, 127550, Russia.
Irina Vladimirovna AkchurinaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Russian State Agrarian University- Moscow Agricultural Academy named after K.A. Timiryazev, 49, str. Timiryazevskaya, Moscow, 127550, Russia.
Georgiy Petrovitch DyulgerDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Russian State Agrarian University- Moscow Agricultural Academy named after K.A. Timiryazev, 49, str. Timiryazevskaya, Moscow, 127550, Russia.
Evgenia Sergeevna LatyninaDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Russian State Agrarian University- Moscow Agricultural Academy named after K.A. Timiryazev, 49, str. Timiryazevskaya, Moscow, 127550, Russia.
Anastasia Vladimirovna GrechenevaDepartment of Applied Informatics, Russian State Agrarian University-Moscow Agricultural Academy named after K.A. Timiryazev, 49, str. Timiryazevskaya, Moscow, 127550, Russia.
Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy · RUSaratov State Vavilov Agrarian University · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aim: In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has become increasingly necessary in the life sciences, particularly medicine and healthcare. This study aimed to systematically review the literature and critically analyze multiple databases on the use of AI in veterinary medicine to assess its challenges. We aim to foster an understanding of the effects that can be approached and applied for professional awareness. Materials and Methods: This study used multiple electronic databases with information on applied AI in veterinary medicine based on the current guidelines outlined in PRISMA and Cochrane for systematic review. The electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Elsevier were thoroughly screened through March 22, 2023. The study design was carefully chosen to emphasize evidence quality and population heterogeneity. Results: A total of 385 of the 883 citations initially obtained were thoroughly reviewed. There were four main areas that AI addressed; the first was diagnostic issues, the second was education, animal production, and epidemiology, the third was animal health and welfare, pathology, and microbiology, and the last was all other categories. The quality assessment of the included studies found that they varied in their relative quality and risk of bias. However, AI aftereffect-linked algorithms have raised criticism of their generated conclusions. Conclusion: Quality assessment noted areas of AI outperformance, but there was criticism of its performance as well. It is recommended that the extent of AI in veterinary medicine should be increased, but it should not take over the profession. The concept of ambient clinical intelligence is adaptive, sensitive, and responsive to the digital environment and may be attractive to veterinary professionals as a means of lowering the fear of automating veterinary medicine. Future studies should focus on an AI model with flexible data input, which can be expanded by clinicians/users to maximize their interaction with good algorithms and reduce any errors generated by the process.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceCochrane studycriterionextracted dataheterogeneitysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38023280
PMCPMC10668547
OpenAlexW4387861163

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.