Woo Myung, Alhanti Brooke, Lusk Sam, Dunston Felicia, Blackwelder Stephen, Lytle Kay S, Goldstein Benjamin A, Bedoya Armando
Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27708, USA.
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27701, USA.
J Pers Med. 2020 Aug 27;10(3):104. doi: 10.3390/jpm10030104.
There is increasing application of machine learning tools to problems in healthcare, with an ultimate goal to improve patient safety and health outcomes. When applied appropriately, machine learning tools can augment clinical care provided to patients. However, even if a model has impressive performance characteristics, prospectively evaluating and effectively implementing models into clinical care remains difficult. The primary objective of this paper is to recount our experiences and challenges in comparing a novel machine learning-based clinical decision support tool to legacy, non-machine learning tools addressing potential safety events in the hospitals and to summarize the obstacles which prevented evaluation of clinical efficacy of tools prior to widespread institutional use. We collected and compared safety events data, specifically patient falls and pressure injuries, between the standard of care approach and machine learning (ML)-based clinical decision support (CDS). Our assessment was limited to performance of the model rather than the workflow due to challenges in directly comparing both approaches. We did note a modest improvement in falls with ML-based CDS; however, it was not possible to determine that overall improvement was due to model characteristics.
机器学习工具在医疗保健领域的应用越来越广泛,其最终目标是提高患者安全和健康结果。如果应用得当,机器学习工具可以增强为患者提供的临床护理。然而,即使一个模型具有令人印象深刻的性能特征,前瞻性地评估模型并将其有效地应用于临床护理仍然很困难。本文的主要目的是讲述我们在将一种基于机器学习的新型临床决策支持工具与传统的非机器学习工具进行比较时的经验和挑战,这些传统工具用于解决医院中的潜在安全事件,并总结在机构广泛使用之前阻碍评估工具临床疗效的障碍。我们收集并比较了护理标准方法和基于机器学习(ML)的临床决策支持(CDS)之间的安全事件数据,特别是患者跌倒和压疮数据。由于直接比较这两种方法存在挑战,我们的评估仅限于模型的性能而非工作流程。我们确实注意到基于ML的CDS在跌倒方面有适度改善;然而,无法确定总体改善是否归因于模型特征。