Assessing the Utility of artificial intelligence in endometriosis: Promises and pitfalls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endometriosis, a chronic condition characterized by the growth of endometrial-like tissue outside of the uterus, poses substantial challenges in terms of diagnosis and treatment. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool in the field of medicine, offering opportunities to address the complexities of endometriosis. This review explores the current landscape of endometriosis diagnosis and treatment, highlighting the potential of AI to alleviate some of the associated burdens and underscoring common pitfalls and challenges when employing AI algorithms in this context. Women's health research in endometriosis has suffered from underfunding, leading to limitations in diagnosis, classification, and treatment approaches. The heterogeneity of symptoms in patients with endometriosis has further complicated efforts to address this condition. New, powerful methods of analysis have the potential to uncover previously unidentified patterns in data relating to endometriosis. AI, a collection of algorithms replicating human decision-making in data analysis, has been increasingly adopted in medical research, including endometriosis studies. While AI offers the ability to identify novel patterns in data and analyze large datasets, its effectiveness hinges on data quality and quantity and the expertise of those implementing the algorithms. Current applications of AI in endometriosis range from diagnostic tools for ultrasound imaging to predicting treatment success. These applications show promise in reducing diagnostic delays, healthcare costs, and providing patients with more treatment options, improving their quality of life. AI holds significant potential in advancing the diagnosis and treatment of endometriosis, but it must be applied carefully and transparently to avoid pitfalls and ensure reproducibility. This review calls for increased scrutiny and accountability in AI research. Addressing these challenges can lead to more effective AI-driven solutions for endometriosis and other complex medical conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.070 | 0.176 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".