Fostering Multidisciplinary Collaboration in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Education: Tutorial Based on the AI-READI Bootcamp
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) into biomedical research requires a workforce fluent in both computational methods and clinical applications. Structured, interdisciplinary training opportunities remain limited, creating a gap between data scientists and clinicians. The National Institutes of Health's Bridge to Artificial Intelligence (Bridge2AI) initiative launched the Artificial Intelligence-Ready and Exploratory Atlas for Diabetes Insights (AI-READI) data generation project to address this gap. AI-READI is creating a multimodal, FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable) dataset-including ophthalmic imaging, physiologic measurements, wearable sensor data, and survey responses-from approximately 4000 participants with or at risk for type 2 diabetes. In parallel, AI-READI established a year-long mentored research program that begins with a 2-week immersive summer bootcamp to provide foundational AI/ML skills grounded in domain-relevant biomedical data. Objective: To describe the design, iterative refinement, and outcomes of the AI-READI Bootcamp, and to share lessons for creating future multidisciplinary AI/ML training programs in biomedical research. Methods: Held annually at the University of California San Diego, the bootcamp combines 80 hours of lectures, coding sessions, and small-group mentorship. Year 1 introduced Python programming, classical ML techniques (eg, logistic regression, convolutional neural networks), and data science methods, such as principal component analysis and clustering, using public datasets. In Year 2, the curriculum was refined based on structured participant feedback-reducing cohort size to increase individualized mentorship, integrating the AI-READI dataset (including retinal images and structured clinical variables), and adding modules on large language models and FAIR data principles. Participant characteristics and satisfaction were assessed through standardized pre- and postbootcamp surveys, and qualitative feedback was analyzed thematically by independent coders. Results: Seventeen participants attended Year 1 and 7 attended Year 2, with an instructor-to-student ratio of approximately 1:2 in the latter. Across both years, postbootcamp evaluations indicated high satisfaction, with Year 2 participants reporting improved experiences due to smaller cohorts, earlier integration of the AI-READI dataset, and greater emphasis on applied learning. In Year 2, mean scores for instructor effectiveness, staff support, and overall enjoyment were perfect (5.00/5.00). Qualitative feedback emphasized the value of working with domain-relevant, multimodal datasets; the benefits of peer collaboration; and the applicability of skills to structured research projects during the subsequent internship year. Conclusions: The AI-READI Bootcamp illustrates how feedback-driven, multidisciplinary training embedded within a longitudinal mentored research program can bridge technical and clinical expertise in biomedical AI. Core elements-diverse trainee cohorts, applied learning with biomedical datasets, and sustained mentorship-offer a replicable model for preparing health professionals for the evolving AI/ML landscape. Future iterations will incorporate additional prebootcamp onboarding modules, objective skill assessments, and long-term tracking of research engagement and productivity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,012 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».