MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372215746 · doi:10.1145/3572334.3572379

Barriers and opportunities to improve renal outcomes in South Africa using AI technology for pediatric ultrasound interpretation

2022· article· en· W4372215746 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lauren Erdman, Karen Milford, Zubrina Solomon, Mandy Rickard, Armando J. Lorenzo, Andrew Grieve, Anna Goldenberg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntervention (counseling)Context (archaeology)Health careKidney diseasePopulationInterpretation (philosophy)Family medicineNursingComputer scienceEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over 10% of the global population is affected by chronic kidney disease (CKD) and those without preventative care and early intervention are the worst impacted. Many childhood precursors to CKD such as hydronephrosis (HN) continue to be detected and treated late in low- and middle-income countries where prenatal and early-life ultrasound is less common. Artificial intelligence-based technology holds promise for improving some of this detection and treatment. In this work, we explore the barriers and opportunities of transferring an AI-based tool for early HN detection in pediatric ultrasound from Canada, where it was initially developed, to South Africa. We explore these challenges and opportunities at the health-system-, institutional-, and provider-levels. Our investigation is performed through interviews with clinicians at various levels, locations, and in different specialties. We find that the context of our tool’s use will change in terms of both clinicians and patients, as the users of our tool in South Africa will have less access to pediatric sonography expertise and, for related reasons, patients will tend to be older when they receive an ultrasound imaging. These differences indicate that while the initial algorithm can be tested and fine-tuned in certain settings, there is a larger need for tools which make standardized ultrasound easier to acquire. The clinicians interviewed are eager for AI-based assistance in caring patients earlier and more effectively and believe algorithms of this kind will be useful for improving care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPediatric Urology and Nephrology StudiesFrench-language works237,207