Navigating the AI-Driven Healthcare Era: A Review of Key Developments
Keywords:
AI and ML in healthcare, AI in diagnosis, AI pains, and gains, the ethics of AI, bias in AI, data privacy, and protection, AI in predictive analysis, healthcare automation, patient-centric care, healthcare equality, early diseases detection, clinical decision-making, AI and healthcare innovation, the fundamentals of health AI, AI & healthcare ethic.Abstract
The application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the provision of healthcare has brought some tremendous changes in medical practices; achieving breakthroughs in diagnostics, treatment and healthcare management. Artificial Intelligence in particular is improving diagnosis identification, disease identification and diagnosis, managing administration information, etc. Chronic disease management: Using artificial intelligence tomorrow’s sicknesses today, using your genes, environment, and even lifestyle/personal choices to deliver more effective cures with minimal side effects. However, several ethical questions are attached to the use of AI in healthcare such as data control, fairness of the algorithms used, and user control and thus for any organization to adopt the use of AI, the following questions should be appropriately answered. Nonetheless, there is a great deal of promise for the application of AI in healthcare including: the alleviation of healthcare inequalities, enhancement on the clinical decision making processes, positive promotion of prevention and patient-centered care delivery. Depending on the further advancement of AI the future in the field of healthcare will include new creations in a predictive analysis of a patient’s condition and in automated systems for a personalized treatment that will improve the operating quality and accessibility of the options for medical services. However, technology and Artificial Intelligence in specifically have the potential of transforming the industry completely than envisaged especially if there shall be set down stringent ethical consideration and research collaboration in this domain by health care professional, technologist, and policymakers. At the end, the purpose of AI in health care is to make health care smarter and superior with the help of human intelligent thus making health care systems efficient, fair towards all patients.
References
Iwamura M, Ide S, Sato K, Kakuta A, Tatsuo S, and Nozaki A, et al. Thin-slice two-dimensional T2-weighted imaging with deep learning-based reconstruction: Improved lesion detection in the brain of patients with multiple sclerosis. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2463/mrms.mp.2022-0112.
Nai YH, Loi HY, O’Doherty S, Tan TH, Reilhac A. Compari son of the performances of machine learning and deep learn ing in improving the quality of low dose lung cancer PET images. Jpn J Radiol. 2022; 40:1290–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-022-01311-z.
Nakao T, Hanaoka S, Nomura Y, Hayashi N, Abe O. Anomaly detection in chest 18F-FDG PET/CT by bayesian deep learn ing. Jpn J Radiol. 2022; 40:730–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604022012492.
Kumamaru KK, Machitori A, Koba R, Ijichi S, Nakajima Y, Aoki S. Global and Japanese regional variations in radiologist poten tial workload for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging examinations. Jpn J Radiol. 2018; 36:273–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-01807245
Cozzi D, Cavigli E, Moroni C, Smorchkova O, Zantonelli G, Pradella S, et al. Ground-glass opacity (GGO): a review of the diferential diagnosis in the era of COVID-19. Jpn J Radiol. 2021; 39:721–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-021-01120-w
Aoki R, Iwasawa T, Hagiwara E, Komatsu S, Utsunomiya D, Ogura T. Pulmonary vascular enlargement and lesion extent on computed tomography are correlated with COVID-19 disease severity. Jpn J Radiol. 2021;39:451–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-020-01085-2.
Zhu QQ, Gong T, Huang GQ, Niu ZF, Yue T, Xu FY, et al. Pul monary artery trunk enlargement on admission as a predictor of mortality in in-hospital patients with COVID-19. Jpn J Radiol. 2021; 39:589–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-021-01094-9
Fukuda A, Yanagawa N, Sekiya N, Ohyama K, Yomota M, Inui T, et al. An analysis of the radiological factors associated with respiratory failure in COVID-19 pneumonia and the CT features among diferent age categories. Jpn J Radiol. 2021;39:783–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-021-01118-4.
Özer H, Kılınçer A, Uysal E, Yormaz B, Cebeci H, Durmaz MS, et al. Diagnostic performance of radiological society of North America structured reporting language for chest computed tomography fndings in patients with COVID-19. Jpn J Radiol. 2021; 39:877–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-021-01128-2
Zhuang Y, Lin L, Xu X, Xia T, Yu H, Fu G, et al. Dynamic changes on chest CT of COVID-19 patients with solitary pul monary lesion in initial CT. Jpn J Radiol. 2021; 39:32–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-020-01037-w.
Kanayama A, Tsuchihashi Y, Otomi Y, Enomoto H, Arima Y, Takahashi T, et alAssociation of severe COVID-19 outcomes with radiological scoring and cardiomegaly: Findings from the COVID-19 inpatients database, Japan. Jpn J Radiol. 2022 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-022-01300-2
Inui S, Fujikawa A, Gonoi W, Kawano S, Sakurai K, Uchida Y, et al. Comparison of CT fndings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia caused by diferent major vari ants. Jpn J Radiol. 2022; 40:1246–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11604-022-01301-1 .
Walston SL, Matsumoto T, Miki Y, Ueda D. Artifcial intelli gence-based model for COVID-19 prognosis incorporating chest radiographs and clinical data; a retrospective model development and validation study. Br J Radiol. 2022; 95:20220058. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20220058.
Matsumoto T, Walston SL, Walston M, Kabata D, Miki Y, Shiba M, et al. Deep learning-based time-to-death prediction model for COVID-19 patients using clinical data and chest radiographs. J Digit Imaging. 2023; 36:178–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-022-00691-y.
Wynants L, Van Calster B, Collins GS, Riley RD, Heinze G, Schuit E, et al. Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of Covid-19: Systematic review and critical appraisal. BMJ. 2020; 369:m1328. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1328
Marmot M, Bell R. Fair society, healthy lives. Public Health. 2012;126(Suppl 1):S4–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2012. 05.014.
Ricci Lara MA, Echeveste R, Ferrante E. Addressing fairness in artifcial intelligence for medical imaging. Nat Commun. 2022; 13:4581. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32186-3.
Abernethy, A. et al. The promise of digital health: then, now, and the future. NAM Perspect. 6 (2022). 2. Akpakwu, E. Four ways AI can make healthcare more efficient and affordable. World Economic Forum https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/05/four-ways-ai-is-bringingdownthecost-ofhealthcare/(2018).
Wong, A. et al. External validation of a widely implemented proprietary sepsis prediction model in hospitalized patients. JAMA Intern Med 181, 1065–1070 (2021).
Ross, C. STAT and MIT rooted out the weaknesses in health care algorithms. Here’s how we did it. STAT https://www.statnews.com/2022/02/28/data-drift-machine-learning/(2022).
Locke, T., Parker, V., Thoumi, A., Goldstein, B. & Silcox, C. Preventing bias and inequities in AI-enabled health tools. https://healthpolicy.duke.edu/publications/preventing-bias-andinequitiesai-enabledhealth-tools
Introducing HealthAI. The International Digital Health and AI Research Collaborative (I-DAIR) https://www.i-dair.org/news/introducinghealthai (2023
Zharima, C., Griffiths, F. & Goudge, J. Exploring the barriers and facilitators to implementing electronic health records in a middleincome country: a qualitative study from South Africa. Front. Digit. Health 5, 1207602 (2023).
Lee, A. R. et al. Identifying facilitators of and barriers to the adoption of dynamic consent in digital health ecosystems: a scoping review.BMC Med. Ethics 24, 107 (2023).
Stoeklé, H. C., Hulier-Ammar, E. & Hervé, C. Data medicine: ‘broad’ or ‘dynamic’ consent? Public Health Ethics 15, 181–185 (2022).
Gebru T, Morgenstern J, Vecchione B, Vaughan JW, Wallach H 3rd, Iii HD, et al. Datasheets for datasets. Commun ACM. 2021. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 64:86–92. https://doi.org/10.1145/3458723
Wenger NK. Women and coronary heart disease: A century after Herrick: Understudied, underdiagnosed, and undertreated. Circu lation. 2012; 126:604–11. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIO NAHA.111.086892.
Appelman Y, van Rijn BB, Ten Haaf ME, Boersma E, Peters SAE. Sex diferences in cardiovascular risk factors and disease prevention. Atherosclerosis. 2015; 241:211–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2015.01.027.
Adamson AS, Smith A. Machine learning and health care dispari ties in dermatology. JAMA Dermatol. 2018; 154:1247–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.2348.
Navarrete-Dechent C, Dusza SW, Liopyris K, Marghoob AA, Halpern AC, Marchetti MA. Automated dermatological diagno sis: hype or reality? J Invest Dermatol. 2018; 138:2277–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jid.2018.04.040
Zech JR, Badgeley MA, Liu M, Costa AB, Titano JJ, Oermann EK. Variable generalization performance of a deep learning model to detect pneumonia in chest radiographs: a cross-sec tional study. PLOS Med. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pmed.1002683.
Wolf RF, Moons KGM, Riley RD, Whiting PF, Westwood M, Collins GS, et al. PROBAST: a tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Intern Med. 2019; 170:51–8. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-1376.
Park SH, Han K. Methodologic guide for evaluating clinical performance and efect of artifcial intelligence technology for medical diagnosis and prediction. Radiology. 2018; 286:800–9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017171920.
Bluemke DA, Moy L, Bredella MA, Ertl-Wagner BB, Fowler KJ, Goh VJ, et al. Assessing radiology research on artifcial intelli gence: a brief guide for authors, reviewers, and readers-from the radiology editorial board. Radiology. 2020; 294:487–9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2019192515
Zainab, H., Khan, A. H., Khan, R., & Hussain, H. K. (2024). Integration of AI and Wearable Devices for Continuous Cardiac Health Monitoring. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Sciences and Arts, 3(4), 123-139.
Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C, Mullainathan S. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of popula tions. Science. 2019; 366:447–53. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax2342.
Meyer IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull. 2003; 129:674–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674
Anderson M, Anderson SL. How should AI be developed, vali dated, and implemented in patient care? AMA J Ethics. Am Med Assoc. 2019; 21:E125-130. https://doi.org/10.1001/amajethics. 2019.125.
Dratsch T, Chen X, Rezazade Mehrizi M, Kloeckner R, Mähringer-Kunz A, Püsken M, et al. Automation bias in mam mography: The impact of artifcial intelligence BI-RADS sug gestions on reader performance. Radiology. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.222176.
Khan, M. I., Arif, A., & Khan, A. R. A. (2024). The Most Recent Advances and Uses of AI in Cybersecurity. BULLET: Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu, 3(4), 566-578.
Walsh CG, Chaudhry B, Dua P, Goodman KW, Kaplan B, Kavu luru R, et al. Stigma, biomarkers, and algorithmic bias: recom mendations for precision behavioral health with artifcial intelli gence. JAMIA Open. 2020; 3:9–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamiaopen/ooz054.
Khan, M. I., Arif, A., & Khan, A. R. A. (2024). AI-Driven Threat Detection: A Brief Overview of AI Techniques in Cybersecurity. BIN: Bulletin Of Informatics, 2(2), 248-261.
Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buist DSM, Kerlikowske K, Toste son ANA, Miglioretti DL, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital screening mammography with and without computer-aided detection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175:1828–37. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.5231
Phansalkar S, van der Sijs H, Tucker AD, Desai AA, Bell DS, Teich JM, et al. Drug—drug interactions that should be noninterruptive in order to reduce alert fatigue in electronic health records. J Am Med Inform Assoc Oxford. 2012. Academic Press; 20:489–93
Fiscella K, Williams DR. Health disparities based on socio economic inequities: implications for urban health care. Acad Med. 2004; 79:1139–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888- 200412000-00004.
Gamble VN. Under the shadow of Tuskegee: African Ameri cans and health care. Am J Public Health. 1997; 87:1773–8. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.87.11.1773.
