Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39586084›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2024

Implementation of Machine Learning Applications in Health Care Organizations: Systematic Review of Empirical Studies.

Luigi M Preti, Vittoria Ardito, Amelia Compagni, Francesco Petracca, Giulia Cappellaro

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. From Integrated Care to Learning Systems.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

5 authors.

Luigi M PretiCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1397-7975
Vittoria ArditoCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2034-716X
Amelia CompagniCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1744-3134
Francesco PetraccaCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6076-6919
Giulia CappellaroCenter for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3645-8462

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a growing enthusiasm for machine learning (ML) among academics and health care practitioners. Despite the transformative potential of ML-based applications for patient care, their uptake and implementation in health care organizations are sporadic. Numerous challenges currently impede or delay the widespread implementation of ML in clinical practice, and limited knowledge is available regarding how these challenges have been addressed.

objectiveThis work aimed to (1) examine the characteristics of ML-based applications and the implementation process in clinical practice, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) for theoretical guidance and (2) synthesize the strategies adopted by health care organizations to foster successful implementation of ML.

methodsA systematic literature review was conducted based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science over a 10-year period (2013-2023). The search strategy was built around 4 blocks of keywords (artificial intelligence, implementation, health care, and study type). Only empirical studies documenting the implementation of ML applications in clinical settings were considered. The implementation process was investigated using a thematic analysis and coding procedure.

resultsThirty-four studies were selected for data synthesis. Selected papers were relatively recent, with only 9% (3/34) of records published before 2019. ML-based applications were implemented mostly within hospitals (29/34, 85%). In terms of clinical workflow, ML-based applications supported mostly prognosis (20/34, 59%) and diagnosis (10/34, 29%). The implementation efforts were analyzed using CFIR domains. As for the inner setting domain, access to knowledge and information (12/34, 35%), information technology infrastructure (11/34, 32%), and organizational culture (9/34, 26%) were among the most observed dimensions influencing the success of implementation. As for the ML innovation itself, factors deemed relevant were its design (15/34, 44%), the relative advantage with respect to existing clinical practice (14/34, 41%), and perceived complexity (14/34, 41%). As for the other domains (ie, processes, roles, and outer setting), stakeholder engagement (12/34, 35%), reflecting and evaluating practices (11/34, 32%), and the presence of implementation leaders (9/34, 26%) were the main factors identified as important.

conclusionsThis review sheds some light on the factors that are relevant and that should be accounted for in the implementation process of ML-based applications in health care. While the relevance of ML-specific dimensions, like trust, emerges clearly across several implementation domains, the evidence from this review highlighted that relevant implementation factors are not necessarily specific for ML but rather transversal for digital health technologies. More research is needed to further clarify the factors that are relevant to implementing ML-based applications at the organizational level and to support their uptake within health care organizations.

trial registrationPROSPERO 403873; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=403873. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/47971.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceDigital HealthHospitalsHumansInformation TechnologyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Workflowartificial intelligencebarriersfacilitatorshealth care organizationimplementationmachine learning

Identifiers

PMID39586084
PMCPMC11629039

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.