Peek Niels, Capurro Daniel, Rozova Vlada, van der Veer Sabine N
The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute (THIS Institute), Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge. Cambridge, UK.
Centre for the Digital Transformation of Health, University of Melbourne & The Royal Melbourne Hospital. Melbourne, Australia.
Yearb Med Inform. 2024 Aug;33(1):103-114. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1800729. Epub 2025 Apr 8.
Despite the surge in development of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to support clinical decision-making, few of these algorithms are used in practice. We reviewed recent literature on clinical deployment of AI-based clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSS), and assessed the maturity of AI-CDSS implementation research. We also aimed to compare and contrast implementation of rule-based CDSS with implementation of AI-CDSS, and to give recommendations for future research in this area.
We searched PubMed and Scopus for publications in 2022 and 2023 that focused on AI and/or CDSS, health care, and implementation research, and extracted: clinical setting; clinical task; translational research phase; study design; participants; implementation theory, model or framework used; and key findings.
We selected and described a total of 31 recent papers addressing implementation of AI-CDSS in clinical practice, categorised into four groups: (i) Implementation theories, frameworks, and models (4 papers); (ii) Stakeholder perspectives (22 papers); (iii) Implementation feasibility (three papers); and (iv) Technical infrastructure (2 papers). Stakeholders saw potential benefits of AI-CDSS, but emphasized the need for a strong evidence base and indicated that systems should fit into clinical workflows. There were clear similarities with rule-based CDSS, but also differences with respect to trust and transparency, knowledge, intellectual property, and regulation.
The field of AI-CDSS implementation research is still in its infancy. It can be strengthened by grounding studies in established theories, models and frameworks from implementation science, focusing on the perspectives of stakeholder groups other than healthcare professionals, conducting more real-world implementation feasibility studies, and through development of reusable technical infrastructure that facilitates rapid deployment of AI-CDSS in clinical practice.
尽管支持临床决策的人工智能(AI)算法发展迅速,但实际应用的此类算法却很少。我们回顾了近期关于基于AI的临床决策支持系统(AI-CDSS)临床应用的文献,并评估了AI-CDSS实施研究的成熟度。我们还旨在比较和对比基于规则的CDSS与AI-CDSS的实施情况,并为该领域的未来研究提供建议。
我们在PubMed和Scopus中搜索了2022年和2023年关注AI和/或CDSS、医疗保健及实施研究的出版物,并提取了以下信息:临床环境;临床任务;转化研究阶段;研究设计;参与者;所使用的实施理论、模型或框架;以及主要发现。
我们共筛选并描述了31篇近期关于AI-CDSS在临床实践中应用的论文,分为四组:(i)实施理论、框架和模型(4篇论文);(ii)利益相关者观点(22篇论文);(iii)实施可行性(3篇论文);以及(iv)技术基础设施(2篇论文)。利益相关者看到了AI-CDSS的潜在好处,但强调需要有强有力的证据基础,并指出系统应融入临床工作流程。与基于规则的CDSS有明显的相似之处,但在信任和透明度、知识、知识产权及监管方面也存在差异。
AI-CDSS实施研究领域仍处于起步阶段。通过将研究建立在实施科学中既定的理论、模型和框架基础上,关注医疗保健专业人员以外的利益相关者群体的观点,开展更多实际应用可行性研究,以及开发便于在临床实践中快速部署AI-CDSS的可重复使用技术基础设施,可以加强该领域的研究。