Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/33918
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorAkhlaghi, Hamed-
dc.contributor.authorFreeman, Sam-
dc.contributor.authorVari, Cynthia-
dc.contributor.authorMcKenna, Bede-
dc.contributor.authorBraitberg, George-
dc.contributor.authorKarro, Jonathan-
dc.contributor.authorTahayori, Bahman-
dc.date2023-
dc.date.accessioned2023-10-04T02:43:32Z-
dc.date.available2023-10-04T02:43:32Z-
dc.date.issued2024-
dc.identifier.citationEmergency Medicine Australasia: EMA 2024-02; 36(1) :en_US
dc.identifier.issn1742-6723-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/33918-
dc.description.abstractArtificial intelligence (AI) has gradually found its way into healthcare, and its future integration into clinical practice is inevitable. In the present study, we evaluate the accuracy of a novel AI algorithm designed to predict admission based on a triage note after clinical implementation. This is the first of such studies to investigate real-time AI performance in the emergency setting. The novel AI algorithm that predicts admission using a triage note was translated into clinical practice and integrated within St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne's electronic emergency patient management system. The data were collected from 1 January 2021 to 17 August 2022 to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the AI system after implementation. A total of 77 125 ED presentations were included. The live AI algorithm has a sensitivity of 73.1% (95% confidence interval 72.5-73.8), specificity of 74.3% (73.9-74.7), positive predictive value of 50% (49.6-50.4) and negative predictive value of 88.7% (88.5-89) with a total accuracy of 74% (73.7-74.3). The accuracy of the system was at the lowest for admission to psychiatric units (34%) and at the highest for gastroenterology and medical admission (84% and 80%, respectively). Our study showed the diagnostic evaluation of a real-time AI clinical decision-support tool became less accurate than the original. Although real-time sensitivity and specificity of the AI tool was still acceptable as a decision-support tool in the ED, we propose that continuous training and evaluation of AI-enabled clinical support tools in healthcare are conducted to ensure consistent accuracy and performance to prevent inadvertent consequences.en_US
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.subjectartificial intelligenceen_US
dc.subjectemergency departmenten_US
dc.subjectmachine learningen_US
dc.subjectresearch translationen_US
dc.subjecttriage noteen_US
dc.titleMachine learning in clinical practice: Evaluation of an artificial intelligence tool after implementation.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleEmergency Medicine Australasia : EMAen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Emergency Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.;Department of Medical Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.;Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.affiliationEmergencyen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationFlorey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/1742-6723.14325en_US
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-3929-7265en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-4013-3364en_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-4927-0023en_US
dc.identifier.pubmedid37771067-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

56
checked on Jan 13, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.