Artificial intelligence, big data and heart transplantation: Actualities
International Journal of Medical Informatics, ISSN: 1386-5056, Vol: 176, Page: 105110
2023
- 9Citations
- 53Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef3
- Captures53
- Readers53
- 53
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
Department of Cardiac Surgery and Transplantation Reports Findings in Artificial Intelligence (Artificial intelligence, big data and heart transplantation: Actualities)
2023 JUN 20 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Robotics & Machine Learning Daily News Daily News -- New research on Artificial
Review Description
As diagnostic and prognostic models developed by traditional statistics perform poorly in real-world, artificial intelligence (AI) and Big Data (BD) may improve the supply chain of heart transplantation (HTx), allocation opportunities, correct treatments, and finally optimize HTx outcome. We explored available studies, and discussed opportunities and limits of medical application of AI to the field of HTx. A systematic overview of studies published up to December 31st, 2022, in English on peer-revied journals, have been identified through PUBMED-MEDLINE-WEB of Science, referring to HTx, AI, BD. Studies were grouped in 4 domains based on main studies’ objectives and results: etiology, diagnosis, prognosis, treatment. A systematic attempt was made to evaluate studies by the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST) and the Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD). Among the 27 publications selected, none used AI applied to BD. Of the selected studies, 4 fell in the domain of etiology, 6 in the domain of diagnosis, 3 in the domain of treatment, and 17 in that of prognosis, as AI was most frequently used for algorithmic prediction and discrimination of survival, but in retrospective cohorts and registries. AI-based algorithms appeared superior to probabilistic functions to predict patterns, but external validation was rarely employed. Indeed, based on PROBAST, selected studies showed, to some extent, significant risk of bias (especially in the domain of predictors and analysis). In addition, as example of applicability in the real-world, a free-use prediction algorithm developed through AI failed to predict 1-year mortality post-HTx in cases from our center. While AI-based prognostic and diagnostic functions performed better than those developed by traditional statistics, risk of bias, lack of external validation, and relatively poor applicability, may affect AI-based tools. More unbiased research with high quality BD meant for AI, transparency and external validations, are needed to have medical AI as a systematic aid to clinical decision making in HTx.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1386505623001284; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105110; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85161301400&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37285695; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1386505623001284; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2023.105110
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know