10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Randomized Controlled Trials of Artificial Intelligence in Clinical Practice: Systematic Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The number of artificial intelligence (AI) studies in medicine has exponentially increased recently. However, there is no clear quantification of the clinical benefits of implementing AI-assisted tools in patient care.

          Objective

          This study aims to systematically review all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of AI-assisted tools to characterize their performance in clinical practice.

          Methods

          CINAHL, Cochrane Central, Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed were searched to identify relevant RCTs published up to July 2021 and comparing the performance of AI-assisted tools with conventional clinical management without AI assistance. We evaluated the primary end points of each study to determine their clinical relevance. This systematic review was conducted following the updated PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines.

          Results

          Among the 11,839 articles retrieved, only 39 (0.33%) RCTs were included. These RCTs were conducted in an approximately equal distribution from North America, Europe, and Asia. AI-assisted tools were implemented in 13 different clinical specialties. Most RCTs were published in the field of gastroenterology, with 15 studies on AI-assisted endoscopy. Most RCTs studied biosignal-based AI-assisted tools, and a minority of RCTs studied AI-assisted tools drawn from clinical data. In 77% (30/39) of the RCTs, AI-assisted interventions outperformed usual clinical care, and clinically relevant outcomes improved with AI-assisted intervention in 70% (21/30) of the studies. Small sample size and single-center design limited the generalizability of these studies.

          Conclusions

          There is growing evidence supporting the implementation of AI-assisted tools in daily clinical practice; however, the number of available RCTs is limited and heterogeneous. More RCTs of AI-assisted tools integrated into clinical practice are needed to advance the role of AI in medicine.

          Trial Registration

          PROSPERO CRD42021286539; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=286539

          Related collections

          Most cited references61

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Trends in Chronic Kidney Disease in China.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Med Internet Res
                J Med Internet Res
                JMIR
                Journal of Medical Internet Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                1439-4456
                1438-8871
                August 2022
                25 August 2022
                : 24
                : 8
                : e37188
                Affiliations
                [1 ] The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care The Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong Hong Kong
                [2 ] Stanley Ho Big Data Decision Analytics Research Centre The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Hong Kong Hong Kong
                [3 ] Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine Nanyang Technological University Singapore Singapore
                [4 ] Department of Medicine (Digestive Diseases) Yale School of Medicine New Haven, CT United States
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Joseph J Y Sung josephsung@ 123456ntu.edu.sg
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4306-4990
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1968-5647
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6261-0037
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9993-7431
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8226-1842
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3125-5199
                Article
                v24i8e37188
                10.2196/37188
                9459941
                35904087
                a368e95d-b4cc-459e-9a8d-93ccd8be2f28
                ©Thomas Y T Lam, Max F K Cheung, Yasmin L Munro, Kong Meng Lim, Dennis Shung, Joseph J Y Sung. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 25.08.2022.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 10 February 2022
                : 19 May 2022
                : 13 June 2022
                : 29 July 2022
                Categories
                Review
                Review

                Medicine
                artificial intelligence,randomized controlled trial,systematic review,clinical,gastroenterology,clinical informatics,mobile phone

                Comments

                Comment on this article