Lennerz Jochen K, Salgado Roberto, Kim Grace E, Sirintrapun Sahussapont Joseph, Thierauf Julia C, Singh Ankit, Indave Iciar, Bard Adam, Weissinger Stephanie E, Heher Yael K, de Baca Monica E, Cree Ian A, Bennett Shannon, Carobene Anna, Ozben Tomris, Ritterhouse Lauren L
Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical, Boston, MA, USA.
Department of Pathology, GZA-ZNA Hospitals, Antwerp, Belgium.
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2023 Jan 25;61(4):544-557. doi: 10.1515/cclm-2022-1151. Print 2023 Mar 28.
Laboratory medicine has reached the era where promises of artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) seem palpable. Currently, the primary responsibility for risk-benefit assessment in clinical practice resides with the medical director. Unfortunately, there is no tool or concept that enables diagnostic quality assessment for the various potential AI/ML applications. Specifically, we noted that an operational definition of laboratory diagnostic quality - for the specific purpose of assessing AI/ML improvements - is currently missing.
A session at the 3rd Strategic Conference of the European Federation of Laboratory Medicine in 2022 on " prompted an expert roundtable discussion. Here we present a conceptual diagnostic quality framework for the specific purpose of assessing AI/ML implementations.
The presented framework is termed diagnostic quality model (DQM) and distinguishes AI/ML improvements at the test, procedure, laboratory, or healthcare ecosystem level. The operational definition illustrates the nested relationship among these levels. The model can help to define relevant objectives for implementation and how levels come together to form coherent diagnostics. The affected levels are referred to as scope and we provide a rubric to quantify AI/ML improvements while complying with existing, mandated regulatory standards. We present 4 relevant clinical scenarios including multi-modal diagnostics and compare the model to existing quality management systems.
A is essential to navigate the complexities of clinical AI/ML implementations. The presented diagnostic quality framework can help to specify and communicate the key implications of AI/ML solutions in laboratory diagnostics.
检验医学已进入人工智能和机器学习(AI/ML)的前景似乎触手可及的时代。目前,临床实践中风险效益评估的主要责任在于医学主任。不幸的是,尚无工具或概念可对各种潜在的AI/ML应用进行诊断质量评估。具体而言,我们注意到目前缺少针对评估AI/ML改进这一特定目的的检验诊断质量的操作定义。
2022年欧洲检验医学联合会第三届战略会议上的一次会议引发了专家圆桌讨论。在此,我们提出一个针对评估AI/ML实施这一特定目的的概念性诊断质量框架。
所提出的框架被称为诊断质量模型(DQM),它区分了在检验、程序、实验室或医疗保健生态系统层面的AI/ML改进。该操作定义阐明了这些层面之间的嵌套关系。该模型有助于定义实施的相关目标以及各层面如何共同形成连贯的诊断。受影响的层面被称为范围,我们提供了一个量规,以便在符合现行法定监管标准的同时量化AI/ML改进。我们展示了4个相关临床场景,包括多模式诊断,并将该模型与现有的质量管理系统进行比较。
一个[此处原文似乎缺失关键内容]对于应对临床AI/ML实施的复杂性至关重要。所提出的诊断质量框架有助于明确和传达AI/ML解决方案在实验室诊断中的关键影响。