Surgeon or Bot? The Risks of Using Artificial Intelligence in Surgical Journal Publications.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Shaffrey EC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10513298 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Surgeon or Bot? The Risks of Using Artificial Intelligence in Surgical Journal Publications.
Shaffrey Ellen C EC Eftekari Sahand C SC Wilke Lee G LG Poore Samuel O SO
Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches 20230628 3
Mini-Abstract ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence (AI) technology that has begun to transform academics through its ability to create human-like text. This has raised ethical concerns about its assistance in writing scientific literature. Our aim is to highlight the benefits and risks that this technology may pose to the surgical field. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Study objectiveTo determine whether there has been growth in publications on the use of artificial intelligence in cardiology and oncology, we assessed historical trends in publications related to artificial intelligence applications in cardiology and oncology, which are the two fields studying the leading causes of death worldwide. Upward trends in publications may indicate increasing interest in the use of artificial intelligence in these crucial fields.Design/settingTo evaluate evidence of increasing publications on the use of artificial intelligence in cardiology and oncology, historical trends in related publications on PubMed (the biomedical repository most frequently used by clinicians and scientists in these fields) were reviewed.ResultsFindings indicated that research output related to artificial intelligence (and its subcategories) generally increased over time, particularly in the last five years. With some initial degree of vacillation in publication trends, a slight qualitative inflection was noted in approximately 2015, in general publications and especially for oncology and cardiology, with subsequent consistent exponential growth. Publications predominantly focused on "machine learning" (n = 20,301), which contributed to the majority of the accelerated growth in the field, compared to "artificial intelligence" (n = 4535), "natural language processing" (n = 2608), and "deep learning" (n = 4459).ConclusionTrends in the general biomedical literature and particularly in cardiology and oncology indicated exponential growth over time. Further exponential growth is expected in future years, as awareness and cross-disciplinary collaboration and education increase. Publications specifically on machine learning will likely continue to lead the way.
| S-EPMC10978330 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of artificial intelligence (AI) with medical images to solve clinical problems is becoming increasingly common, and the development of new AI solutions is leading to more studies and publications using this computational technology. As a novel research area, the use of common standards to aid AI developers and reviewers as quality control criteria will improve the peer review process. Although some guidelines do exist, their heterogeneity and extension advocate that more explicit and simple schemes should be applied on the publication practice. Based on a review of existing AI guidelines, a proposal which collects, unifies, and simplifies the most relevant criteria was developed. The MAIC-10 (Must AI Criteria-10) checklist with 10 items was implemented as a guide to design studies and evaluate publications related to AI in the field of medical imaging. Articles published in Insights into Imaging in 2021 were selected to calculate their corresponding MAIC-10 quality score. The mean score was found to be 5.6 ± 1.6, with critical items present in most articles, such as "Clinical need", "Data annotation", "Robustness", and "Transparency" present in more than 80% of papers, while improvements in other areas were identified. MAIC-10 was also observed to achieve the highest intra-observer reproducibility when compared to other existing checklists, with an overall reduction in terms of checklist length and complexity. In summary, MAIC-10 represents a short and simple quality assessment tool which is objective, robust and widely applicable to AI studies in medical imaging.
| S-EPMC9842808 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) in skin cancer is a promising research field to assist physicians and to provide support to patients remotely. Physicians' awareness to new developments in AI research is important to define the best practices and scope of integrating AI-enabled technologies within a clinical setting.ObjectivesTo analyze the characteristics and trends of AI skin cancer publications from dermatology journals.MethodsAI skin cancer publications were retrieved in June 2022 from the Web of Science. Publications were screened by title, abstract, and keywords to assess eligibility. Publications were fully reviewed. Publications were divided between nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC), melanoma, and skin cancer studies. The primary measured outcome was the number of citations. The secondary measured outcomes were articles' general characteristics and features related to AI.ResultsA total of 168 articles were included: 25 on NMSC, 77 on melanoma, and 66 on skin cancer. The most common types of skin cancers were melanoma (134, 79.8%), basal cell carcinoma (61, 36.3%), and squamous cell carcinoma (45, 26.9%). All articles were published between 2000 and 2022, with 49 (29.2%) of them being published in 2021. Original studies that developed or assessed an algorithm predominantly used supervised learning (66, 97.0%) and deep neural networks (42, 67.7%). The most used imaging modalities were standard dermoscopy (76, 45.2%) and clinical images (39, 23.2%).ConclusionsMost publications focused on developing or assessing screening technologies with mainly deep neural network algorithms. This indicates the eminent need for dermatologists to label or annotate images used by novel AI systems.
| S-EPMC11015717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesLetters of recommendation (LORs) are essential within academic medicine, affecting a number of important decisions regarding advancement, yet these letters take significant amounts of time and labor to prepare. The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, are gaining popularity for a variety of academic writing tasks and offer an innovative solution to relieve the burden of letter writing. It is yet to be determined if ChatGPT could aid in crafting LORs, particularly in high-stakes contexts like faculty promotion. To determine the feasibility of this process and whether there is a significant difference between AI and human-authored letters, we conducted a study aimed at determining whether academic physicians can distinguish between the two.MethodsA quasi-experimental study was conducted using a single-blind design. Academic physicians with experience in reviewing LORs were presented with LORs for promotion to associate professor, written by either humans or AI. Participants reviewed LORs and identified the authorship. Statistical analysis was performed to determine accuracy in distinguishing between human and AI-authored LORs. Additionally, the perceived quality and persuasiveness of the LORs were compared based on suspected and actual authorship.ResultsA total of 32 participants completed letter review. The mean accuracy of distinguishing between human- versus AI-authored LORs was 59.4%. The reviewer's certainty and time spent deliberating did not significantly impact accuracy. LORs suspected to be human-authored were rated more favorably in terms of quality and persuasiveness. A difference in gender-biased language was observed in our letters: human-authored letters contained significantly more female-associated words, while the majority of AI-authored letters tended to use more male-associated words.ConclusionsParticipants were unable to reliably differentiate between human- and AI-authored LORs for promotion. AI may be able to generate LORs and relieve the burden of letter writing for academicians. New strategies, policies, and guidelines are needed to balance the benefits of AI while preserving integrity and fairness in academic promotion decisions.
| S-EPMC10688127 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSurgeons make complex, high-stakes decisions under time constraints and uncertainty, with significant effect on patient outcomes. This review describes the weaknesses of traditional clinical decision-support systems and proposes that artificial intelligence should be used to augment surgical decision-making.ObservationsSurgical decision-making is dominated by hypothetical-deductive reasoning, individual judgment, and heuristics. These factors can lead to bias, error, and preventable harm. Traditional predictive analytics and clinical decision-support systems are intended to augment surgical decision-making, but their clinical utility is compromised by time-consuming manual data management and suboptimal accuracy. These challenges can be overcome by automated artificial intelligence models fed by livestreaming electronic health record data with mobile device outputs. This approach would require data standardization, advances in model interpretability, careful implementation and monitoring, attention to ethical challenges involving algorithm bias and accountability for errors, and preservation of bedside assessment and human intuition in the decision-making process.Conclusions and relevanceIntegration of artificial intelligence with surgical decision-making has the potential to transform care by augmenting the decision to operate, informed consent process, identification and mitigation of modifiable risk factors, decisions regarding postoperative management, and shared decisions regarding resource use.
| S-EPMC7286802 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We developed a surgical support system that visualises important microanatomies using artificial intelligence (AI). This study evaluated its accuracy in recognising the thoracic nerves during lung cancer surgery. Recognition models were created with deep learning using images precisely annotated for nerves. Computational evaluation was performed using the Dice index and the Jaccard index. Four general thoracic surgeons evaluated the accuracy of nerve recognition. Further, the differences in time lag, image quality and smoothness of movement between the AI system and surgical monitor were assessed. Ratings were made using a five-point scale. The computational evaluation was relatively favourable, with a Dice index of 0.56 and a Jaccard index of 0.39. The AI system was used for 10 thoracoscopic surgeries for lung cancer. The accuracy of thoracic nerve recognition was satisfactory, with a recall score of 4.5 ± 0.4 and a precision score of 4.0 ± 0.9. Though smoothness of motion (3.2 ± 0.4) differed slightly, nearly no difference in time lag (4.9 ± 0.3) and image quality (4.6 ± 0.5) between the AI system and the surgical monitor were observed. In conclusion, the AI surgical support system has a satisfactory accuracy in recognising the thoracic nerves.
| S-EPMC11306550 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the volume of manuscripts submitted for publication growing every year, the deficiencies of peer review (e.g. long review times) are becoming more apparent. Editorial strategies, sets of guidelines designed to speed up the process and reduce editors' workloads, are treated as trade secrets by publishing houses and are not shared publicly. To improve the effectiveness of their strategies, editors in small publishing groups are faced with undertaking an iterative trial-and-error approach. We show that Cartesian Genetic Programming, a nature-inspired evolutionary algorithm, can dramatically improve editorial strategies. The artificially evolved strategy reduced the duration of the peer review process by 30%, without increasing the pool of reviewers (in comparison to a typical human-developed strategy). Evolutionary computation has typically been used in technological processes or biological ecosystems. Our results demonstrate that genetic programs can improve real-world social systems that are usually much harder to understand and control than physical systems.
| S-EPMC5607159 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) methods and AI-enabled metrics hold tremendous potential to advance surgical education. Our objective was to generate consensus guidance on specific needs for AI methods and AI-enabled metrics for surgical education.Study designThe study included a systematic literature search, a virtual conference, and a 3-round Delphi survey of 40 representative multidisciplinary stakeholders with domain expertise selected through purposeful sampling. The accelerated Delphi process was completed within 10 days. The survey covered overall utility, anticipated future (10-year time horizon), and applications for surgical training, assessment, and feedback. Consensus was agreement among 80% or more respondents. We coded survey questions into 11 themes and descriptively analyzed the responses.ResultsThe respondents included surgeons (40%), engineers (15%), affiliates of industry (27.5%), professional societies (7.5%), regulatory agencies (7.5%), and a lawyer (2.5%). The survey included 155 questions; consensus was achieved on 136 (87.7%). The panel listed 6 deliverables each for AI-enhanced learning curve analytics and surgical skill assessment. For feedback, the panel identified 10 priority deliverables spanning 2-year (n = 2), 5-year (n = 4), and 10-year (n = 4) timeframes. Within 2 years, the panel expects development of methods to recognize anatomy in images of the surgical field and to provide surgeons with performance feedback immediately after an operation. The panel also identified 5 essential that should be included in operative performance reports for surgeons.ConclusionsThe Delphi panel consensus provides a specific, bold, and forward-looking roadmap for AI methods and AI-enabled metrics for surgical education.
| S-EPMC10634198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough radical gastrectomy with lymph node dissection is the standard treatment for gastric cancer, the complication rate remains high. Thus, estimation of surgical complexity is required for safety. We aim to investigate the association between the surgical process and complexity, such as a risk of complications in robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG), to establish an artificial intelligence (AI)-based automated surgical phase recognition by analyzing robotic surgical videos, and to investigate the predictability of surgical complexity by AI.MethodThis study assessed clinical data and robotic surgical videos for 56 patients who underwent RDG for gastric cancer. We investigated (1) the relationship between surgical complexity and perioperative factors (patient characteristics, surgical process); (2) AI training for automated phase recognition and model performance was assessed by comparing predictions to the surgeon-annotated reference; (3) AI model predictability for surgical complexity was calculated by the area under the curve.ResultSurgical complexity score comprised extended total surgical duration, bleeding, and complications and was strongly associated with the intraoperative surgical process, especially in the beginning phases (area under the curve 0.913). We established an AI model that can recognize surgical phases from video with 87% accuracy; AI can determine intraoperative surgical complexity by calculating the duration of beginning phases from phases 1-3 (area under the curve 0.859).ConclusionSurgical complexity, as a surrogate of short-term outcomes, can be predicted by the surgical process, especially in the extended duration of beginning phases. Surgical complexity can also be evaluated with automation using our artificial intelligence-based model.
| S-EPMC9949687 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This paper employs insights from earth science on the financial risk of project developments to present an economic theory of critical minerals. Our theory posits that back-ended critical mineral projects that have unaddressed technical and non-technical barriers, such as those involving lithium and cobalt, exhibit an additional risk for investors which we term the "back-ended risk premium". We show that the back-ended risk premium increases the cost of capital and, therefore, has the potential to reduce investment in the sector. We posit that the back-ended risk premium may also reduce the gains in productivity expected from artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in the mining sector. Progress in AI may, however, lessen the back-ended risk premium itself by shortening the duration of mining projects and the required rate of investment by reducing the associated risk. We conclude that the best way to reduce the costs associated with energy transition is for governments to invest heavily in AI mining technologies and research.
| S-EPMC11344786 | biostudies-literature