Exploring how feedback reflects entrustment decisions using artificial intelligence

From explainable to interpretable deep learning for natural language processing in healthcare: How far from reality?

Deep learning (DL) has substantially enhanced natural language processing (NLP) in healthcare research. However, the increasing complexity of DL-based NLP necessitates transparent model interpretability, or at least explainability, for reliable decision-making. This work presents a thorough scoping review of explainable and interpretable DL in healthcare NLP. The term "eXplainable and Interpretable Artificial Intelligence" (XIAI) is introduced to distinguish XAI from IAI. Different models are further categorized based on their functionality (model-, input-, output-based) and scope (local, global). Our analysis shows that attention mechanisms are the most prevalent emerging IAI technique. The use of IAI is growing, distinguishing it from XAI. The major challenges identified are that most XIAI does not explore "global" modelling processes, the lack of best practices, and the lack of systematic evaluation and benchmarks. One important opportunity is to use attention mechanisms to enhance multi-modal XIAI for personalized medicine. Additionally, combining DL with causal logic holds promise. Our discussion encourages the integration of XIAI in Large Language Models (LLMs) and domain-specific smaller models. In conclusion, XIAI adoption in healthcare requires dedicated in-house expertise. Collaboration with domain experts, end-users, and policymakers can lead to ready-to-use XIAI methods across NLP and medical tasks. While challenges exist, XIAI techniques offer a valuable foundation for interpretable NLP algorithms in healthcare.

Assessing supervisor versus trainee viewpoints of entrustment through cognitive and affective lenses: an artificial intelligence investigation of bias in feedback

The entrustment framework redirects assessment from considering only trainees' competence to decision-making about their readiness to perform clinical tasks independently. Since trainees and supervisors both contribute to entrustment decisions, we examined the cognitive and affective factors that underly their negotiation of trust, and whether trainee demographic characteristics may bias them. Using a document analysis approach, we adapted large language models (LLMs) to examine feedback dialogs (N = 24,187, each with an associated entrustment rating) between medical student trainees and their clinical supervisors. We compared how trainees and supervisors differentially documented feedback dialogs about similar tasks by identifying qualitative themes and quantitatively assessing their correlation with entrustment ratings. Supervisors' themes predominantly reflected skills related to patient presentations, while trainees' themes were broader-including clinical performance and personal qualities. To examine affect, we trained an LLM to measure feedback sentiment. On average, trainees used more negative language (5.3% lower probability of positive sentiment, p < 0.05) compared to supervisors, while documenting higher entrustment ratings (+ 0.08 on a 1-4 scale, p < 0.05). We also found biases tied to demographic characteristics: trainees' documentation reflected more positive sentiment in the case of male trainees (+ 1.3%, p < 0.05) and of trainees underrepresented in medicine (UIM) (+ 1.3%, p < 0.05). Entrustment ratings did not appear to reflect these biases, neither when documented by trainee nor supervisor. As such, bias appeared to influence the emotive language trainees used to document entrustment more than the degree of entrustment they experienced. Mitigating these biases is nonetheless important because they may affect trainees' assimilation into their roles and formation of trusting relationships.

The fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 156

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in medical education has the potential to facilitate complicated tasks and improve efficiency. For example, AI could help automate assessment of written responses, or provide feedback on medical image interpretations with excellent reliability. While applications of AI in learning, instruction, and assessment are growing, further exploration is still required. There exist few conceptual or methodological guides for medical educators wishing to evaluate or engage in AI research. In this guide, we aim to: 1) describe practical considerations involved in reading and conducting studies in medical education using AI, 2) define basic terminology and 3) identify which medical education problems and data are ideally-suited for using AI.

Ethical use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Professions Education: AMEE Guide No. 158

Health Professions Education (HPE) has benefitted from the advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and is set to benefit more in the future. Just as any technological advance opens discussions about ethics, so the implications of AI for HPE ethics need to be identified, anticipated, and accommodated so that HPE can utilise AI without compromising crucial ethical principles. Rather than focussing on AI technology, this Guide focuses on the ethical issues likely to face HPE teachers and administrators as they encounter and use AI systems in their teaching environment. While many of the ethical principles may be familiar to readers in other contexts, they will be viewed in light of AI, and some unfamiliar issues will be introduced. They include data gathering, anonymity, privacy, consent, data ownership, security, bias, transparency, responsibility, autonomy, and beneficence. In the Guide, each topic explains the concept and its importance and gives some indication of how to cope with its complexities. Ideas are drawn from personal experience and the relevant literature. In most topics, further reading is suggested so that readers may further explore the concepts at their leisure. The aim is for HPE teachers and decision-makers at all levels to be alert to these issues and to take proactive action to be prepared to deal with the ethical problems and opportunities that AI usage presents to HPE.

Utilizing Natural Language Processing of Narrative Feedback to Develop a Predictive Model of Pre-Clerkship Performance: Lessons Learned

Background

Natural language processing is a promising technique that can be used to create efficiencies in the review of narrative feedback to learners. The Feinberg School of Medicine has implemented formal review of pre-clerkship narrative feedback since 2014 through its portfolio assessment system but this process requires considerable time and effort. This article describes how natural language processing was used to build a predictive model of pre-clerkship student performance that can be utilized to assist competency committee reviews.

Approach

The authors took an iterative and inductive approach to the analysis, which allowed them to identify characteristics of narrative feedback that are both predictive of performance and useful to faculty reviewers. Words and phrases were manually grouped into topics that represented concepts illustrating student performance. Topics were reviewed by experienced reviewers, tested for consistency across time, and checked to ensure they did not demonstrate bias.

Outcomes

Sixteen topic groups of words and phrases were found to be predictive of performance. The best-fitting model used a combination of topic groups, word counts, and categorical ratings. The model had an AUC value of 0.92 on the training data and 0.88 on the test data.

Reflection

A thoughtful, careful approach to using natural language processing was essential. Given the idiosyncrasies of narrative feedback in medical education, standard natural language processing packages were not adequate for predicting student outcomes. Rather, employing qualitative techniques including repeated member checking and iterative revision resulted in a useful and salient predictive model.