Gomez Rossi Jesus, Feldberg Ben, Krois Joachim, Schwendicke Falk
Department of Oral Diagnostics, Digital Health and Health Services Research, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
JMIR Med Inform. 2022 Aug 12;10(8):e33703. doi: 10.2196/33703.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine demands consideration of clinical, technical, and economic aspects to generate impactful research of a novel and highly versatile technology.
We aimed to systematically scope existing literature on the cost-effectiveness of AI and to extract and summarize clinical, technical, and economic dimensions required for a comprehensive assessment.
A scoping literature review was conducted to map medical, technical, and economic aspects considered in studies on the cost-effectiveness of medical AI. Based on these, a framework for health policy analysis was developed.
Among 4820 eligible studies, 13 met the inclusion criteria for our review. Internal medicine and emergency medicine were the clinical disciplines most frequently analyzed. Most of the studies included were from the United States (5/13, 39%), assessed solutions requiring market access (9/13, 69%), and proposed optimization of direct resources as the most frequent value proposition (7/13, 53%). On the other hand, technical aspects were not uniformly disclosed in the studies we analyzed. A minority of articles explicitly stated the payment mechanism assumed (5/13, 38%), while it remained unspecified in the majority (8/13, 62%) of studies.
Current studies on the cost-effectiveness of AI do not allow to determine if the investigated AI solutions are clinically, technically, and economically viable. Further research and improved reporting on these dimensions seem relevant to recommend and assess potential use cases for this technology.
医学人工智能(AI)的成本效益分析需要考虑临床、技术和经济方面,以便对这一新颖且用途广泛的技术开展有影响力的研究。
我们旨在系统梳理有关AI成本效益的现有文献,并提取和总结进行全面评估所需的临床、技术和经济维度。
开展了一项文献综述,以梳理医学AI成本效益研究中所考虑的医学、技术和经济方面。在此基础上,制定了一项卫生政策分析框架。
在4820项符合条件的研究中,有13项符合我们综述的纳入标准。内科和急诊医学是分析最为频繁的临床学科。纳入的大多数研究来自美国(5/13,39%),评估了需要市场准入的解决方案(9/13,69%),并提出将直接资源优化作为最常见的价值主张(7/13,53%)。另一方面,我们分析的研究中技术方面的披露并不统一。少数文章明确说明了假设的支付机制(5/13,38%),而在大多数研究(8/13,62%)中仍未明确说明。
目前关于AI成本效益的研究无法确定所研究的AI解决方案在临床、技术和经济上是否可行。在这些维度上开展进一步研究并改进报告,对于推荐和评估该技术的潜在用例似乎很有必要。