Artificial intelligence-enabled tools in cardiovascular medicine: A survey of current use, perceptions, and challenges.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Numerous artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled tools for cardiovascular diseases have been published, with a high impact on public health. However, few have been adopted into, or have meaningfully affected, routine clinical care.Objective
To evaluate current awareness, perceptions, and clinical use of AI-enabled digital health tools for patients with cardiovascular disease, and challenges to adoption.Methods
This mixed-methods study included interviews with 12 cardiologists and 8 health information technology (IT) administrators, and a follow-on survey of 90 cardiologists and 30 IT administrators.Results
We identified 5 major challenges: (1) limited knowledge, (2) insufficient usability, (3) cost constraints, (4) poor electronic health record interoperability, and (5) lack of trust. A minority of cardiologists were using AI tools; more were prepared to implement AI tools, but their sophistication level varied greatly.Conclusion
Most respondents believe in the potential of AI-enabled tools to improve care quality and efficiency, but they identified several fundamental barriers to wide-scale adoption.
SUBMITTER: Schepart A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10282011 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Artificial intelligence-enabled tools in cardiovascular medicine: A survey of current use, perceptions, and challenges.
Schepart Alexander A Burton Arianna A Durkin Larry L Fuller Allison A Charap Ellyn E Bhambri Rahul R Ahmad Faraz S FS
Cardiovascular digital health journal 20230503 3
<h4>Background</h4>Numerous artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled tools for cardiovascular diseases have been published, with a high impact on public health. However, few have been adopted into, or have meaningfully affected, routine clinical care.<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate current awareness, perceptions, and clinical use of AI-enabled digital health tools for patients with cardiovascular disease, and challenges to adoption.<h4>Methods</h4>This mixed-methods study included interviews with 12 c ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Given the rapidity with which artificial intelligence is gaining momentum in clinical medicine, current physician leaders have called for more incorporation of artificial intelligence topics into undergraduate medical education. This is to prepare future physicians to better work together with artificial intelligence technology. However, the first step in curriculum development is to survey the needs of end users. There has not been a study to determine which media and which topics are most preferred by US medical students to learn about the topic of artificial intelligence in medicine.<h4>Objective</h4>We aimed to survey US medical students on the need to incorporate artificial intelligence in undergraduate medical education and their preferred means to do so to assist with future education initiatives.<h4>Methods</h4>A mixed methods survey comprising both specific questions and a write-in response section was sent through Qualtrics to US medical students in May 2021. Likert scale questions were used to first assess various perceptions of artificial intelligence in medicine. Specific questions were posed regarding learning format and topics in artificial intelligence.<h4>Results</h4>We surveyed 390 US medical students with an average age of 26 (SD 3) years from 17 different medical programs (the estimated response rate was 3.5%). A majority (355/388, 91.5%) of respondents agreed that training in artificial intelligence concepts during medical school would be useful for their future. While 79.4% (308/388) were excited to use artificial intelligence technologies, 91.2% (353/387) either reported that their medical schools did not offer resources or were unsure if they did so. Short lectures (264/378, 69.8%), formal electives (180/378, 47.6%), and Q and A panels (167/378, 44.2%) were identified as preferred formats, while fundamental concepts of artificial intelligence (247/379, 65.2%), when to use artificial intelligence in medicine (227/379, 59.9%), and pros and cons of using artificial intelligence (224/379, 59.1%) were the most preferred topics for enhancing their training.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The results of this study indicate that current US medical students recognize the importance of artificial intelligence in medicine and acknowledge that current formal education and resources to study artificial intelligence-related topics are limited in most US medical schools. Respondents also indicated that a hybrid formal/flexible format would be most appropriate for incorporating artificial intelligence as a topic in US medical schools. Based on these data, we conclude that there is a definitive knowledge gap in artificial intelligence education within current medical education in the US. Further, the results suggest there is a disparity in opinions on the specific format and topics to be introduced.
| S-EPMC9636531 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Precision medicine has the potential to revolutionize the way cardiovascular diseases are diagnosed, predicted, and treated by tailoring treatment strategies to the individual characteristics of each patient. Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently emerged as a promising tool for improving the accuracy and efficiency of precision cardiovascular medicine. In this scoping review, we aimed to identify and summarize the current state of the literature on the use of AI in precision cardiovascular medicine. A comprehensive search of electronic databases, including Scopes, Google Scholar, and PubMed, was conducted to identify relevant studies. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 28 studies were included in the review. We found that AI is being increasingly applied in various areas of cardiovascular medicine, including the diagnosis, prognosis of cardiovascular diseases, risk prediction and stratification, and treatment planning. As a result, most of these studies focused on prediction (50%), followed by diagnosis (21%), phenotyping (14%), and risk stratification (14%). A variety of machine learning models were utilized in these studies, with logistic regression being the most used (36%), followed by random forest (32%), support vector machine (25%), and deep learning models such as neural networks (18%). Other models, such as hierarchical clustering (11%), Cox regression (11%), and natural language processing (4%), were also utilized. The data sources used in these studies included electronic health records (79%), imaging data (43%), and omics data (4%). We found that AI is being increasingly applied in various areas of cardiovascular medicine, including the diagnosis, prognosis of cardiovascular diseases, risk prediction and stratification, and treatment planning. The results of the review showed that AI has the potential to improve the performance of cardiovascular disease diagnosis and prognosis, as well as to identify individuals at high risk of developing cardiovascular diseases. However, further research is needed to fully evaluate the clinical utility and effectiveness of AI-based approaches in precision cardiovascular medicine. Overall, our review provided a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge in the field of AI-based methods for precision cardiovascular medicine and offered new insights for researchers interested in this research area.
| S-EPMC10455092 | biostudies-literature
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Artificial intelligence (AI) is heralded as an approach that might augment or substitute for the limited processing power of the human brain of primary health care (PHC) professionals. However, there are concerns that AI-mediated decisions may be hard to validate and challenge, or may result in rogue decisions.<h4>Objective</h4>To form consensus about perceptions, issues, and challenges of AI in primary care.<h4>Method</h4>A three-round Delphi study was conducted. Round 1 explored experts' viewpoints on AI in PHC (n=20). Round 2 rated the appropriateness of statements arising from round one (n=12). The third round was an online panel discussion of findings (n=8) with the members of both the International Medical Informatics Association and the European Federation of Medical Informatics Primary Health Care Informatics Working Groups.<h4>Results</h4>PHC and informatics experts reported AI has potential to improve managerial and clinical decisions and processes, and this would be facilitated by common data standards. The respondents did not agree that AI applications should learn and adapt to clinician preferences or behaviour and they did not agree on the extent of AI potential for harm to patients. It was more difficult to assess the impact of AI-based applications on continuity and coordination of care.<h4>Conclusion</h4>While the use of AI in medicine should enhance healthcare delivery, we need to ensure meticulous design and evaluation of AI applications. The primary care informatics community needs to be proactive and to guide the ethical and rigorous development of AI applications so that they will be safe and effective.
| S-EPMC6697547 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative force in various sectors, including medicine and healthcare. Large language models like ChatGPT showcase AI's potential by generating human-like text through prompts. ChatGPT's adaptability holds promise for reshaping medical practices, improving patient care, and enhancing interactions among healthcare professionals, patients, and data. In pandemic management, ChatGPT rapidly disseminates vital information. It serves as a virtual assistant in surgical consultations, aids dental practices, simplifies medical education, and aids in disease diagnosis. A total of 82 papers were categorised into eight major areas, which are G1: treatment and medicine, G2: buildings and equipment, G3: parts of the human body and areas of the disease, G4: patients, G5: citizens, G6: cellular imaging, radiology, pulse and medical images, G7: doctors and nurses, and G8: tools, devices and administration. Balancing AI's role with human judgment remains a challenge. A systematic literature review using the PRISMA approach explored AI's transformative potential in healthcare, highlighting ChatGPT's versatile applications, limitations, motivation, and challenges. In conclusion, ChatGPT's diverse medical applications demonstrate its potential for innovation, serving as a valuable resource for students, academics, and researchers in healthcare. Additionally, this study serves as a guide, assisting students, academics, and researchers in the field of medicine and healthcare alike.
| S-EPMC10802884 | biostudies-literature
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Recent studies have demonstrated the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy for managing gastrointestinal diseases. However, there is limited knowledge of the perspective of endoscopists towards AI technology, particularly in the Asian community. This study aims to bridge this knowledge gap to guide policymakers, healthcare providers, and technology developers through an Asia AI Task Force.<h4>Methods</h4>An online survey of 45 questions exploring (a) the perceived benefits of AI in endoscopy, (b) the barriers to adopting AI in endoscopy, (c) the priority areas and barriers to research in AI endoscopy, as well as (d) priorities for an Asia AI Task Force were distributed between November 2022 and May 2023 to endoscopists from sixteen medical institutes across ten Asian regions.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 293 participants completed the survey. Two-fifths (41.98%, n = 123) report no prior exposure to AI endoscopy. The majority (73.2%, n = 90/123) of those without prior AI exposure express concerns about the accountability of AI and its impact on working practices. Almost all participants agree that AI enhances quality improvement (90.8%, n = 266) and leads to better diagnosis (90.4%, n = 265). 69% (n = 202) identify "staying up to date with AI advances" as the top challenge towards clinical adoption of AI. Notably, those without prior AI exposure express high concern regarding accountability for the wrong diagnoses (73.2% vs. 60.6%, p = 0.03) and lack of clinical trials (76.4% vs. 57.1%, p = 0.001). Most respondents prioritise developing a reference paper guide for clinicians interested in AI (81.2%) and supporting funding applications for AI research (81.5%) as key areas that an Asia AI Endoscopy task force should address.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The survey results from Asian endoscopists emphasise the pressing need for collaborative frameworks and educational initiatives, including establishing an Asia AI Task Force, to facilitate the successful integration of AI in endoscopy practice and research across the region.
| S-EPMC12307732 | biostudies-literature
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Artificial intelligence (AI) applications that utilize machine learning are on the rise in clinical research and provide highly promising applications in specific use cases. However, wide clinical adoption remains far off. This review reflects on common barriers and current solution approaches.<h4>Summary</h4>Key challenges are abbreviated as the RISE criteria: Regulatory aspects, Interpretability, interoperability, and the need for Structured data and Evidence. As reoccurring barriers of AI adoption, these concepts are delineated and complemented by points to consider and possible solutions for effective and safe use of AI applications.<h4>Key messages</h4>There is a fraction of AI applications with proven clinical benefits and regulatory approval. Many new promising systems are the subject of current research but share common issues for wide clinical adoption. The RISE criteria can support preparation for challenges and pitfalls when designing or introducing AI applications into clinical practice.
| S-EPMC7768160 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) represents a rapidly developing field. Its use can improve diagnosis and therapy in many areas of medicine. Despite this enormous progress, many physicians perceive it as a black box and are skeptical about it. This review will present the basics of machine learning. Different classifications of artificial intelligence, such as supervised versus unsupervised and discriminative versus generative AI, are given. Analogies to human intelligence are discussed as far as algorithms are oriented toward it. In the second step, the most common models like random forest, k-means clustering, convolutional neural network, and transformers will be presented in a way that the underlying idea can be understood. Corresponding medical applications in cardiovascular medicine will be named for all models, respectively. The overview is intended to show that the term artificial intelligence covers a wide range of different concepts. It should help physicians understand the principles of AI to make up one's minds about its application in cardiology. It should also enable them to evaluate results obtained with AI's help critically.
| S-EPMC10766001 | biostudies-literature
Project description:<h4>Objectives</h4>The objective of this study was to evaluate radiologists' and radiographers' opinions and perspectives on artificial intelligence (AI) and its integration into the radiology department. Additionally, we investigated the most common challenges and barriers that radiologists and radiographers face when learning about AI.<h4>Methods</h4>A nationwide, online descriptive cross-sectional survey was distributed to radiologists and radiographers working in hospitals and medical centres from May 29, 2023 to July 30, 2023. The questionnaire examined the participants' opinions, feelings, and predictions regarding AI and its applications in the radiology department. Descriptive statistics were used to report the participants' demographics and responses. Five-points Likert-scale data were reported using divergent stacked bar graphs to highlight any central tendencies.<h4>Results</h4>Responses were collected from 258 participants, revealing a positive attitude towards implementing AI. Both radiologists and radiographers predicted breast imaging would be the subspecialty most impacted by the AI revolution. MRI, mammography, and CT were identified as the primary modalities with significant importance in the field of AI application. The major barrier encountered by radiologists and radiographers when learning about AI was the lack of mentorship, guidance, and support from experts.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Participants demonstrated a positive attitude towards learning about AI and implementing it in the radiology practice. However, radiologists and radiographers encounter several barriers when learning about AI, such as the absence of experienced professionals support and direction.<h4>Advances in knowledge</h4>Radiologists and radiographers reported several barriers to AI learning, with the most significant being the lack of mentorship and guidance from experts, followed by the lack of funding and investment in new technologies.
| S-EPMC11027289 | biostudies-literature
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>Researchers routinely evaluate novel biomarkers for incorporation into clinical risk models, weighing tradeoffs between cost, availability, and ease of deployment. For risk assessment in population health initiatives, ideal inputs would be those already available for most patients. We hypothesized that common hematologic markers (eg, hematocrit), available in an outpatient complete blood count without differential, would be useful to develop risk models for cardiovascular events.<h4>Methods</h4>We developed Cox proportional hazards models for predicting heart attack, ischemic stroke, heart failure hospitalization, revascularization, and all-cause mortality. For predictors, we used 10 hematologic indices (eg, hematocrit) from routine laboratory measurements, collected March 2016 to May 2017 along with demographic data and diagnostic codes. As outcomes, we used neural network-based automated event adjudication of 1 028 294 discharge summaries. We trained models on 23 238 patients from one hospital in Boston and evaluated them on 29 671 patients from a second one. We assessed calibration using Brier score and discrimination using Harrell's concordance index. In addition, to determine the utility of high-dimensional interactions, we compared our proportional hazards models to random survival forest models.<h4>Results</h4>Event rates in our cohort ranged from 0.0067 to 0.075 per person-year. Models using only hematology indices had concordance index ranging from 0.60 to 0.80 on an external validation set and showed the best discrimination when predicting heart failure (0.80 [95% CI, 0.79-0.82]) and all-cause mortality (0.78 [0.77-0.80]). Compared with models trained only on demographic data and diagnostic codes, models that also used hematology indices had better discrimination and calibration. The concordance index of the resulting models ranged from 0.75 to 0.85 and the improvement in concordance index ranged up to 0.072. Random survival forests had minimal improvement over proportional hazards models.<h4>Conclusions</h4>We conclude that low-cost, ubiquitous inputs, if biologically informative, can provide population-level readouts of risk.
| S-EPMC9208816 | biostudies-literature
Project description:<b>Objectives:</b> The medical community is in agreement that artificial intelligence (AI) will have a radical impact on patient care in the near future. The purpose of this study is to assess the awareness of AI technologies among health professionals and to investigate their perceptions toward AI applications in medicine. <b>Design:</b> A web-based Google Forms survey was distributed via the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust e-newsletter. <b>Setting:</b> Only staff working at the NHS Foundation Trust received an invitation to complete the online questionnaire. <b>Participants:</b> 98 healthcare professionals out of 7,538 (response rate 1.3%; CI 95%; margin of error 9.64%) completed the survey, including medical doctors, nurses, therapists, managers, and others. <b>Primary outcome:</b> To investigate the prior knowledge of health professionals on the subject of AI as well as their attitudes and worries about its current and future applications. <b>Results:</b> 64% of respondents reported never coming across applications of AI in their work and 87% did not know the difference between machine learning and deep learning, although 50% knew at least one of the two terms. Furthermore, only 5% stated using speech recognition or transcription applications on a daily basis, while 63% never utilize them. 80% of participants believed there may be serious privacy issues associated with the use of AI and 40% considered AI to be potentially even more dangerous than nuclear weapons. However, 79% also believed AI could be useful or extremely useful in their field of work and only 10% were worried AI will replace them at their job. <b>Conclusions:</b> Despite agreeing on the usefulness of AI in the medical field, most health professionals lack a full understanding of the principles of AI and are worried about potential consequences of its widespread use in clinical practice. The cooperation of healthcare workers is crucial for the integration of AI into clinical practice and without it the NHS may miss out on an exceptionally rewarding opportunity. This highlights the need for better education and clear regulatory frameworks.
| S-EPMC7861214 | biostudies-literature