Comments on: “Machine learning as a supportive tool to recognize cardiac arrest in emergency calls”

Resuscitation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 144 ◽  
pp. 203-204
Author(s):  
Felix C. Müller ◽  
Mathias W. Brejnebøl
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto V. Zicari ◽  
James Brusseau ◽  
Stig Nikolaj Blomberg ◽  
Helle Collatz Christensen ◽  
Megan Coffee ◽  
...  

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to greatly improve the delivery of healthcare and other services that advance population health and wellbeing. However, the use of AI in healthcare also brings potential risks that may cause unintended harm. To guide future developments in AI, the High-Level Expert Group on AI set up by the European Commission (EC), recently published ethics guidelines for what it terms “trustworthy” AI. These guidelines are aimed at a variety of stakeholders, especially guiding practitioners toward more ethical and more robust applications of AI. In line with efforts of the EC, AI ethics scholarship focuses increasingly on converting abstract principles into actionable recommendations. However, the interpretation, relevance, and implementation of trustworthy AI depend on the domain and the context in which the AI system is used. The main contribution of this paper is to demonstrate how to use the general AI HLEG trustworthy AI guidelines in practice in the healthcare domain. To this end, we present a best practice of assessing the use of machine learning as a supportive tool to recognize cardiac arrest in emergency calls. The AI system under assessment is currently in use in the city of Copenhagen in Denmark. The assessment is accomplished by an independent team composed of philosophers, policy makers, social scientists, technical, legal, and medical experts. By leveraging an interdisciplinary team, we aim to expose the complex trade-offs and the necessity for such thorough human review when tackling socio-technical applications of AI in healthcare. For the assessment, we use a process to assess trustworthy AI, called 1Z-Inspection® to identify specific challenges and potential ethical trade-offs when we consider AI in practice.


Resuscitation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 144 ◽  
pp. 205-206
Author(s):  
Stig Nikolaj Blomberg ◽  
Fredrik Folke ◽  
Annette Kjær Ersbøll ◽  
Helle Collatz Christensen ◽  
Christian Torp-Pedersen ◽  
...  

Resuscitation ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 138 ◽  
pp. 322-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stig Nikolaj Blomberg ◽  
Fredrik Folke ◽  
Annette Kjær Ersbøll ◽  
Helle Collatz Christensen ◽  
Christian Torp-Pedersen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsiao-Ko Chang ◽  
Hui-Chih Wang ◽  
Chih-Fen Huang ◽  
Feipei Lai

BACKGROUND In most of Taiwan’s medical institutions, congestion is a serious problem for emergency departments. Due to a lack of beds, patients spend more time in emergency retention zones, which make it difficult to detect cardiac arrest (CA). OBJECTIVE We seek to develop a Drug Early Warning System Model (DEWSM), it included drug injections and vital signs as this research important features. We use it to predict cardiac arrest in emergency departments via drug classification and medical expert suggestion. METHODS We propose this new model for detecting cardiac arrest via drug classification and by using a sliding window; we apply learning-based algorithms to time-series data for a DEWSM. By treating drug features as a dynamic time-series factor for cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) patients, we increase sensitivity, reduce false alarm rates and mortality, and increase the model’s accuracy. To evaluate the proposed model, we use the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS Four important findings are as follows: (1) We identify the most important drug predictors: bits (intravenous therapy), and replenishers and regulators of water and electrolytes (fluid and electrolyte supplement). The best AUROC of bits is 85%, it means the medical expert suggest the drug features: bits, it will affect the vital signs, and then the evaluate this model correctly classified patients with CPR reach 85%; that of replenishers and regulators of water and electrolytes is 86%. These two features are the most influential of the drug features in the task. (2) We verify feature selection, in which accounting for drugs improve the accuracy: In Task 1, the best AUROC of vital signs is 77%, and that of all features is 86%. In Task 2, the best AUROC of all features is 85%, which demonstrates that thus accounting for the drugs significantly affects prediction. (3) We use a better model: For traditional machine learning, this study adds a new AI technology: the long short-term memory (LSTM) model with the best time-series accuracy, comparable to the traditional random forest (RF) model; the two AUROC measures are 85%. It can be seen that the use of new AI technology will achieve better results, currently comparable to the accuracy of traditional common RF, and the LSTM model can be adjusted in the future to obtain better results. (4) We determine whether the event can be predicted beforehand: The best classifier is still an RF model, in which the observational starting time is 4 hours before the CPR event. Although the accuracy is impaired, the predictive accuracy still reaches 70%. Therefore, we believe that CPR events can be predicted four hours before the event. CONCLUSIONS This paper uses a sliding window to account for dynamic time-series data consisting of the patient’s vital signs and drug injections. The National Early Warning Score (NEWS) only focuses on the score of vital signs, and does not include factors related to drug injections. In this study, the experimental results of adding the drug injections are better than only vital signs. In a comparison with NEWS, we improve predictive accuracy via feature selection, which includes drugs as features. In addition, we use traditional machine learning methods and deep learning (using LSTM method as the main processing time series data) as the basis for comparison of this research. The proposed DEWSM, which offers 4-hour predictions, is better than the NEWS in the literature. This also confirms that the doctor’s heuristic rules are consistent with the results found by machine learning algorithms.


Heart Rhythm ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. S476-S477
Author(s):  
Christopher C. Cheung ◽  
Brianna Davies ◽  
Jason D. Roberts ◽  
Rafik Tadros ◽  
Martin S. Green ◽  
...  

PLoS Medicine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. e1002709 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shane Nanayakkara ◽  
Sam Fogarty ◽  
Michael Tremeer ◽  
Kelvin Ross ◽  
Brent Richards ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document