Artificial intelligence for diagnosing rare bone diseases: a global survey of healthcare professionals
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Rare bone diseases (RBDs) are an important group of conditions characterized by abnormalities in bone and cartilage. Their large number, individual rarity, and heterogeneity make accurate and timely diagnosis challenging. Establishing correlations between genotype and phenotype (mainly via imaging) is critical for diagnosing RBDs. Image recognition artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to significantly improve the diagnostic process by assisting healthcare providers to identify and differentiate imaging patterns associated with various RBDs. This survey study sought to assess the interest of various healthcare providers worldwide in utilizing an AI-based assistant tool for the differential diagnosis of RBDs. Method Survey data were collected from March to September 2024. The survey was performed online and the link was disseminated via direct email, newsletters, and flyers at scientific talks and conferences. Results We received 103 completed surveys, representing respondents from 27 different countries covering most global regions, but mostly from Europe, the United States, and Canada. The majority of the participants are physicians (n = 92, 89%) and primarily work at academic medical centers (n = 84, 81%). While each participant could select multiple specialties, the most frequent clinician types were medical geneticists, pediatricians, and endocrinologists, accounting for 71 (69%) of the respondents. Ninety-four (91%) of the respondents find imaging to be very or extremely important, and the majority (n = 84, 81%) consider X-rays to be the most important imaging modality. Although around half of the participants (n = 45) have concerns about AI-related errors and consider the explainability of AI algorithms to be very (42/103) or extremely (9/103) important, 81% of the respondents report that they are somewhat (n = 39) or extremely (n = 45) likely to consider integrating image recognition AI into their current diagnostic workflow. Conclusions Most survey participants are open to integrating image recognition AI into their RBD diagnostic workflow. However, concerns about AI-related errors, privacy, and model interpretability highlight the importance of transparent collaboration between developers and healthcare professionals throughout the development process to ensure that such technologies are clinically trustworthy and practically adoptable.
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,013 | 0,000 |
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 découle