Learning From Experience and Finding the Right Balance in the Governance of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Health Technologies

Transforming Healthcare with AI: Promises, Pitfalls, and Pathways Forward

This perspective paper provides a comprehensive examination of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare, focusing on its transformative impact on clinical practices, decision-making, and physician-patient relationships. By integrating insights from evidence, research, and real-world examples, it offers a balanced analysis of AI's capabilities and limitations, emphasizing its role in streamlining administrative processes, enhancing patient care, and reducing physician burnout while maintaining a human-centric approach in medicine. The research underscores AI's capacity to augment clinical decision-making and improve patient interactions, but it also highlights the variable impact of AI in different healthcare settings. The need for context-specific adaptations and careful integration of AI technologies into existing healthcare workflows is emphasized to maximize benefits and minimize unintended consequences. Significant attention is given to the implications of AI on the roles and competencies of healthcare professionals. The emergence of AI necessitates new skills in data literacy and technology use, prompting a shift in educational curricula towards digital health and AI training. Ethical considerations are a pivotal aspect of the discussion. The paper explores the challenges posed by data privacy concerns, algorithmic biases, and ensuring equitable access to AI-driven healthcare. It advocates for the development of comprehensive ethical frameworks and ongoing research to guide the responsible use of AI in healthcare. Conclusively, the paper advocates for a balanced approach to AI adoption in healthcare, highlighting the importance of ongoing research, strategic implementation, and the synergistic combination of human expertise with AI technologies for optimal patient care.

Human-artificial intelligence interaction in gastrointestinal endoscopy

The number and variety of applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is growing rapidly. New technologies based on machine learning (ML) and convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are at various stages of development and deployment to assist patients and endoscopists in preparing for endoscopic procedures, in detection, diagnosis and classification of pathology during endoscopy and in confirmation of key performance indicators. Platforms based on ML and CNNs require regulatory approval as medical devices. Interactions between humans and the technologies we use are complex and are influenced by design, behavioural and psychological elements. Due to the substantial differences between AI and prior technologies, important differences may be expected in how we interact with advice from AI technologies. Human–AI interaction (HAII) may be optimised by developing AI algorithms to minimise false positives and designing platform interfaces to maximise usability. Human factors influencing HAII may include automation bias, alarm fatigue, algorithm aversion, learning effect and deskilling. Each of these areas merits further study in the specific setting of AI applications in GI endoscopy and professional societies should engage to ensure that sufficient emphasis is placed on human-centred design in development of new AI technologies.

eHealth implementation in Europe: a scoping review on legal, ethical, financial, and technological aspects

Background

The evolution of eHealth development has shifted from standalone tools to comprehensive digital health environments, fostering data exchange among diverse stakeholders and systems. Nevertheless, existing research and implementation frameworks have primarily emphasized technological and organizational aspects of eHealth implementation, overlooking the intricate legal, ethical, and financial considerations. It is essential to discover what legal, ethical, financial, and technological challenges should be considered to ensure successful and sustainable implementation of eHealth.

Objective

This review aims to provide insights into barriers and facilitators of legal, ethical, financial, and technological aspects for successful implementation of complex eHealth technologies, which impacts multiple levels and multiple stakeholders.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted by querying PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ACM Digital Library (2018-2023) for studies describing the implementation process of eHealth technologies that facilitate data exchange. Studies solely reporting clinical outcomes or conducted outside Europe were excluded. Two independent reviewers selected the studies. A conceptual framework was constructed through axial and inductive coding, extracting data from literature on legal, ethical, financial, and technological aspects of eHealth implementation. This framework guided systematic extraction and interpretation.

Results

The search resulted in 7.308 studies that were screened for eligibility, of which 35 (0.48%) were included. Legal barriers revolve around data confidentiality and security, necessitating clear regulatory guidelines. Ethical barriers span consent, responsibility, liability, and validation complexities, necessitating robust frameworks. Financial barriers stem from inadequate funding, requiring (commercial) partnerships and business models. Technological issues include interoperability, integration, and malfunctioning, necessitating strategies for enhancing data reliability, improving accessibility, and aligning eHealth technology with existing systems for smoother integration.

Conclusions

This research highlights the multifaceted nature of eHealth implementation, encompassing legal, ethical, financial, and technological considerations. Collaborative stakeholder engagement is paramount for effective decision-making and aligns with the transition from standalone eHealth tools to integrated digital health environments. Identifying suitable stakeholders and recognizing their stakes and values enriches implementation strategies with expertise and guidance across all aspects. Future research should explore the timing of these considerations and practical solutions for regulatory compliance, funding, navigation of responsibility and liability, and business models for reimbursement strategies.

New regulatory thinking is needed for AI-based personalised drug and cell therapies in precision oncology

Until recently the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in precision oncology was confined to activities in drug development and had limited impact on the personalisation of therapy. Now, a number of approaches have been proposed for the personalisation of drug and cell therapies with AI applied to therapy design, planning and delivery at the patient's bedside. Some drug and cell-based therapies are already tuneable to the individual to optimise efficacy, to reduce toxicity, to adapt the dosing regime, to design combination therapy approaches and, preclinically, even to personalise the receptor design of cell therapies. Developments in AI-based healthcare are accelerating through the adoption of foundation models, and generalist medical AI models have been proposed. The application of these approaches in therapy design is already being explored and realistic short-term advances include the application to the personalised design and delivery of drugs and cell therapies. With this pace of development, the limiting step to adoption will likely be the capacity and appropriateness of regulatory frameworks. This article explores emerging concepts and new ideas for the regulation of AI-enabled personalised cancer therapies in the context of existing and in development governance frameworks.

Early experiences of integrating an artificial intelligence-based diagnostic decision support system into radiology settings: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support systems to aid diagnosis are increasingly being developed and implemented but with limited understanding of how such systems integrate with existing clinical work and organizational practices. We explored the early experiences of stakeholders using an AI-based imaging software tool Veye Lung Nodules (VLN) aiding the detection, classification, and measurement of pulmonary nodules in computed tomography scans of the chest.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed semistructured interviews and observations across early adopter deployment sites with clinicians, strategic decision-makers, suppliers, patients with long-term chest conditions, and academics with expertise in the use of diagnostic AI in radiology settings. We coded the data using the Technology, People, Organizations, and Macroenvironmental factors framework.

RESULTS

We conducted 39 interviews. Clinicians reported VLN to be easy to use with little disruption to the workflow. There were differences in patterns of use between experts and novice users with experts critically evaluating system recommendations and actively compensating for system limitations to achieve more reliable performance. Patients also viewed the tool positively. There were contextual variations in tool performance and use between different hospital sites and different use cases. Implementation challenges included integration with existing information systems, data protection, and perceived issues surrounding wider and sustained adoption, including procurement costs.

DISCUSSION

Tool performance was variable, affected by integration into workflows and divisions of labor and knowledge, as well as technical configuration and infrastructure.

CONCLUSION

The socio-organizational factors affecting performance of diagnostic AI are under-researched and require attention and further research.

Holistic Human-Serving Digitization of Health Care Needs Integrated Automated System-Level Assessment Tools

Digital health tools, platforms, and artificial intelligence- or machine learning-based clinical decision support systems are increasingly part of health delivery approaches, with an ever-greater degree of system interaction. Critical to the successful deployment of these tools is their functional integration into existing clinical routines and workflows. This depends on system interoperability and on intuitive and safe user interface design. The importance of minimizing emergent workflow stress through human factors research and purposeful design for integration cannot be overstated. Usability of tools in practice is as important as algorithm quality. Regulatory and health technology assessment frameworks recognize the importance of these factors to a certain extent, but their focus remains mainly on the individual product rather than on emergent system and workflow effects. The measurement of performance and user experience has so far been performed in ad hoc, nonstandardized ways by individual actors using their own evaluation approaches. We propose that a standard framework for system-level and holistic evaluation could be built into interacting digital systems to enable systematic and standardized system-wide, multiproduct, postmarket surveillance and technology assessment. Such a system could be made available to developers through regulatory or assessment bodies as an application programming interface and could be a requirement for digital tool certification, just as interoperability is. This would enable health systems and tool developers to collect system-level data directly from real device use cases, enabling the controlled and safe delivery of systematic quality assessment or improvement studies suitable for the complexity and interconnectedness of clinical workflows using developing digital health technologies.

Governance of research and product improvement studies in consumer mental health apps. Interviews with researchers and app developers

Consumer mental health apps (MHAs) collect and generate mental health-related data on their users, which can be leveraged for research and product improvement studies. Such studies are associated with ethical issues that may be difficult for researchers and app developers to assess. To improve ethical study conduct, governance through rules, agreements and customs could be relied upon, but their translation into practice is subject to barriers. This qualitative interview study with 17 researchers and app developers looked into the role and impact of governance standards on consumer MHA studies. Interviewees experienced a significant number of rules, agreements and customs, although not all of the governance standards that can potentially be applicable. Standards did have an impact on the interests of researchers and app developers, app users and society, but this impact was mediated by several barriers related to their conceptualization and implementation. Conceptualization barriers impacted the development of a standard, the inclusion of relevant concepts and the coordination between standards. Implementation barriers concerned the resource cost of understanding a standard, as well as suboptimal enforcement. The framework developed in this study can support more effective efforts to improve the governance of future consumer MHA studies.

What is coming next in health technology startups? Some insights and practice guidelines

Health technology startups are experiencing a significant surge in growth, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic, as they address gaps in the sector. However, despite their increasing prevalence, there is still relatively limited knowledge about this sector's evolution. This opinion article explores emerging trends in health startups, including their market size, growth, significant challenges, and guidelines for key stakeholders from a global healthcare service industry perspective. By gaining a better understanding of these trends, new research opportunities and evidence-based practices can be identified.