Governing Data and Artificial Intelligence for Health Care: Developing an International Understanding

AI maturity in health care: An overview of 10 OECD countries

BACKGROUND

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its applications in health care are on the agenda of policymakers around the world, but a major challenge remains, namely, to set policies that will ensure wide acceptance and capture the value of AI while mitigating associated risks.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to provide an overview of how OECD countries strategize about how to integrate AI into health care and to determine their actual level of AI maturity.

METHODS

A scan of government-based AI strategies and initiatives adopted in 10 proactive OECD countries was conducted. Available documentation was analyzed, using the Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development's roadmap to AI maturity as a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

The findings reveal that most selected OECD countries are at the Emerging stage (Level 2) of AI in health maturity. Despite considerable funding and a variety of approaches to the development of an AI in health supporting ecosystem, only the United Kingdom and United States have reached the highest level of maturity, an integrated and collaborative AI in health ecosystem (Level 3).

CONCLUSION

Despite policymakers looking for opportunities to expedite efforts related to AI, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to ensure the sustainable development and safe use of AI in health. The principles of equifinality and mindfulness must thus guide policymaking in the development of AI in health care.

Optimizing artificial intelligence in sepsis management: Opportunities in the present and looking closely to the future

Sepsis remains a major challenge internationally for healthcare systems. Its incidence is rising due to poor public awareness and delays in its recognition and subsequent management. In sepsis, mortality increases with every hour left untreated. Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming worldwide healthcare delivery at present. This review has outlined how AI can augment strategies to address this global disease burden. AI and machine learning (ML) algorithms can analyze vast quantities of increasingly complex clinical datasets from electronic medical records to assist clinicians in diagnosing and treating sepsis earlier than traditional methods. Our review highlights how these models can predict the risk of sepsis and organ failure even before it occurs. This gives providers additional time to plan and execute treatment plans, thereby avoiding increasing complications associated with delayed diagnosis of sepsis. The potential for cost savings with AI implementation is also discussed, including improving workflow efficiencies, reducing administrative costs, and improving healthcare outcomes. Despite these advantages, clinicians have been slow to adopt AI into clinical practice. Some of the limitations posed by AI solutions include the lack of diverse data sets for model building so that they are widely applicable for routine clinical use. Furthermore, the subsequent algorithms are often based on complex mathematics leading to clinician hesitancy to embrace such technologies. Finally, we highlight the need for robust political and regulatory frameworks in this area to achieve the trust and approval of clinicians and patients to implement this transformational technology.

Harnessing the Power of AI: A Comprehensive Review of Its Impact and Challenges in Nursing Science and Healthcare

This comprehensive review delves into the impact and challenges of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in nursing science and healthcare. AI has already demonstrated its transformative potential in these fields, with applications spanning from personalized care and diagnostic accuracy to predictive analytics and telemedicine. However, the integration of AI has its complexities, including concerns related to data privacy, ethical considerations, and biases in algorithms and datasets. The future of healthcare appears promising, with AI poised to advance diagnostics, treatment, and healthcare practices. Nevertheless, it is crucial to remember that AI should complement, not replace, healthcare professionals, preserving the essential human element of care. To maximize AI's potential in healthcare, interdisciplinary collaboration, ethical guidelines, and the protection of patient rights are essential. This review concludes with a call to action, emphasizing the need for ongoing research and collective efforts to ensure that AI contributes to improved healthcare outcomes while upholding the highest standards of ethics and patient-centered care.

Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Perception and Reality

Artificial intelligence (AI) has birthed the new "big thing" in modern medicine. It promises to bring about safer and improved care that will be beneficial to patients and become a helpful tool in the hands of a skilled physician. Despite its anticipation, however, the implementation and usage of AI are still in their elementary phases, particularly due to legal and ethical considerations that border on "data." These challenges should not be brushed aside but rather be recognized and resolved to enable acceptance by all relevant stakeholders without prejudice. Once these challenges can be overcome, AI will truly revolutionize the field of medicine with improved diagnostic accuracy, a reduction in physician burnout, and an enhanced treatment modality. It is therefore paramount that AI be embraced by physicians and integrated into medical education in order to be well-prepared for our role in the future of medicine.

Evaluating the translation of implementation science to clinical artificial intelligence: a bibliometric study of qualitative research

Introduction

Whilst a theoretical basis for implementation research is seen as advantageous, there is little clarity over if and how the application of theories, models or frameworks (TMF) impact implementation outcomes. Clinical artificial intelligence (AI) continues to receive multi-stakeholder interest and investment, yet a significant implementation gap remains. This bibliometric study aims to measure and characterize TMF application in qualitative clinical AI research to identify opportunities to improve research practice and its impact on clinical AI implementation.

Methods

Qualitative research of stakeholder perspectives on clinical AI published between January 2014 and October 2022 was systematically identified. Eligible studies were characterized by their publication type, clinical and geographical context, type of clinical AI studied, data collection method, participants and application of any TMF. Each TMF applied by eligible studies, its justification and mode of application was characterized.

Results

Of 202 eligible studies, 70 (34.7%) applied a TMF. There was an 8-fold increase in the number of publications between 2014 and 2022 but no significant increase in the proportion applying TMFs. Of the 50 TMFs applied, 40 (80%) were only applied once, with the Technology Acceptance Model applied most frequently (n = 9). Seven TMFs were novel contributions embedded within an eligible study. A minority of studies justified TMF application (n = 51,58.6%) and it was uncommon to discuss an alternative TMF or the limitations of the one selected (n = 11,12.6%). The most common way in which a TMF was applied in eligible studies was data analysis (n = 44,50.6%). Implementation guidelines or tools were explicitly referenced by 2 reports (1.0%).

Conclusion

TMFs have not been commonly applied in qualitative research of clinical AI. When TMFs have been applied there has been (i) little consensus on TMF selection (ii) limited description of selection rationale and (iii) lack of clarity over how TMFs inform research. We consider this to represent an opportunity to improve implementation science's translation to clinical AI research and clinical AI into practice by promoting the rigor and frequency of TMF application. We recommend that the finite resources of the implementation science community are diverted toward increasing accessibility and engagement with theory informed practices. The considered application of theories, models and frameworks (TMF) are thought to contribute to the impact of implementation science on the translation of innovations into real-world care. The frequency and nature of TMF use are yet to be described within digital health innovations, including the prominent field of clinical AI. A well-known implementation gap, coined as the "AI chasm" continues to limit the impact of clinical AI on real-world care. From this bibliometric study of the frequency and quality of TMF use within qualitative clinical AI research, we found that TMFs are usually not applied, their selection is highly varied between studies and there is not often a convincing rationale for their selection. Promoting the rigor and frequency of TMF use appears to present an opportunity to improve the translation of clinical AI into practice.