Economics of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Diagnosis vs. Treatment

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Motivation: The price of medical treatment continues to rise due to (i) an increasing population; (ii) an aging human growth; (iii) disease prevalence; (iv) a rise in the frequency of patients that utilize health care services; and (v) increase in the price. Objective: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is already well-known for its superiority in various healthcare applications, including the segmentation of lesions in images, speech recognition, smartphone personal assistants, navigation, ride-sharing apps, and many more. Our study is based on two hypotheses: (i) AI offers more economic solutions compared to conventional methods; (ii) AI treatment offers stronger economics compared to AI diagnosis. This novel study aims to evaluate AI technology in the context of healthcare costs, namely in the areas of diagnosis and treatment, and then compare it to the traditional or non-AI-based approaches. Methodology: PRISMA was used to select the best 200 studies for AI in healthcare with a primary focus on cost reduction, especially towards diagnosis and treatment. We defined the diagnosis and treatment architectures, investigated their characteristics, and categorized the roles that AI plays in the diagnostic and therapeutic paradigms. We experimented with various combinations of different assumptions by integrating AI and then comparing it against conventional costs. Lastly, we dwell on three powerful future concepts of AI, namely, pruning, bias, explainability, and regulatory approvals of AI systems. Conclusions: The model shows tremendous cost savings using AI tools in diagnosis and treatment. The economics of AI can be improved by incorporating pruning, reduction in AI bias, explainability, and regulatory approvals.

Related collections

Most cited references 189

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis

Dinggang Shen, Guorong Wu, Heung-Il Suk (2017)

This review covers computer-assisted analysis of images in the field of medical imaging. Recent advances in machine learning, especially with regard to deep learning, are helping to identify, classify, and quantify patterns in medical images. At the core of these advances is the ability to exploit hierarchical feature representations learned solely from data, instead of features designed by hand according to domain-specific knowledge. Deep learning is rapidly becoming the state of the art, leading to enhanced performance in various medical applications. We introduce the fundamentals of deep learning methods and review their successes in image registration, detection of anatomical and cellular structures, tissue segmentation, computer-aided disease diagnosis and prognosis, and so on. We conclude by discussing research issues and suggesting future directions for further improvement.

0 comments Cited 963 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare

Thomas Davenport, Ravi Kalakota (2019)

The complexity and rise of data in healthcare means that artificial intelligence (AI) will increasingly be applied within the field. Several types of AI are already being employed by payers and providers of care, and life sciences companies. The key categories of applications involve diagnosis and treatment recommendations, patient engagement and adherence, and administrative activities. Although there are many instances in which AI can perform healthcare tasks as well or better than humans, implementation factors will prevent large-scale automation of healthcare professional jobs for a considerable period. Ethical issues in the application of AI to healthcare are also discussed.

0 comments Cited 501 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Can machine-learning improve cardiovascular risk prediction using routine clinical data?

Stephen Weng, Jenna Reps, Joe Kai … (2017)

Background Current approaches to predict cardiovascular risk fail to identify many people who would benefit from preventive treatment, while others receive unnecessary intervention. Machine-learning offers opportunity to improve accuracy by exploiting complex interactions between risk factors. We assessed whether machine-learning can improve cardiovascular risk prediction. Methods Prospective cohort study using routine clinical data of 378,256 patients from UK family practices, free from cardiovascular disease at outset. Four machine-learning algorithms (random forest, logistic regression, gradient boosting machines, neural networks) were compared to an established algorithm (American College of Cardiology guidelines) to predict first cardiovascular event over 10-years. Predictive accuracy was assessed by area under the ‘receiver operating curve’ (AUC); and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) to predict 7.5% cardiovascular risk (threshold for initiating statins). Findings 24,970 incident cardiovascular events (6.6%) occurred. Compared to the established risk prediction algorithm (AUC 0.728, 95% CI 0.723–0.735), machine-learning algorithms improved prediction: random forest +1.7% (AUC 0.745, 95% CI 0.739–0.750), logistic regression +3.2% (AUC 0.760, 95% CI 0.755–0.766), gradient boosting +3.3% (AUC 0.761, 95% CI 0.755–0.766), neural networks +3.6% (AUC 0.764, 95% CI 0.759–0.769). The highest achieving (neural networks) algorithm predicted 4,998/7,404 cases (sensitivity 67.5%, PPV 18.4%) and 53,458/75,585 non-cases (specificity 70.7%, NPV 95.7%), correctly predicting 355 (+7.6%) more patients who developed cardiovascular disease compared to the established algorithm. Conclusions Machine-learning significantly improves accuracy of cardiovascular risk prediction, increasing the number of patients identified who could benefit from preventive treatment, while avoiding unnecessary treatment of others.