A Bayesian Network Concept for Pain Assessment (Preprint)

O. Sadik
{"title":"A Bayesian Network Concept for Pain Assessment (Preprint)","authors":"O. Sadik","doi":"10.2196/preprints.35711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n UNSTRUCTURED\n Pain is a subjective phenomenon caused/perceived centrally and modified by physical, physiological, or social influences. Currently, the most commonly used approaches for pain measurement rely on self-reporting of pain level on a discrete rating scale. This provides a subjective and only semi-quantitative indicator of pain. \n\nThis paper presents an approach that combines self-reported pain with pain-related biomarkers to be obtained from biosensors (in development) and possibly other sources of evidence to provide more dependable estimates of experienced pain, a clinical decision support system. We illustrate the approach using a Bayes network, but also describe other artificial intelligence (AI) methods that provide other ways to combine evidence. We also propose an optimization approach for tuning the AI method parameters (opaque to clinicians) so as to best approximate the kinds of outputs most useful to medical practitioners.\n\nWe present some data from a sample of 379 patients that illustrate several evidence patterns we may expect in real healthcare situations. The majority (79.7%) of our patients show consistent evidence suggesting this biomarker approach may be reasonable. We also found five patterns of inconsistent evidence. These suggest a direction for further exploration. Finally, we sketch out an approach for collecting medical experts’ guidance as to the way the combined evidence might be presented so as to provide the most useful guidance (also needed for any optimization approach). We recognize that one possible outcome may be that all this approach may be able to provide is a quantified measure of the extent to which the evidence is consistent or not, leaving the final decision to the clinicians (where it must reside). Pointers to additional sources of evidence might also be possible in some situations.\n","PeriodicalId":87288,"journal":{"name":"JMIR biomedical engineering","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR biomedical engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/preprints.35711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

UNSTRUCTURED Pain is a subjective phenomenon caused/perceived centrally and modified by physical, physiological, or social influences. Currently, the most commonly used approaches for pain measurement rely on self-reporting of pain level on a discrete rating scale. This provides a subjective and only semi-quantitative indicator of pain. This paper presents an approach that combines self-reported pain with pain-related biomarkers to be obtained from biosensors (in development) and possibly other sources of evidence to provide more dependable estimates of experienced pain, a clinical decision support system. We illustrate the approach using a Bayes network, but also describe other artificial intelligence (AI) methods that provide other ways to combine evidence. We also propose an optimization approach for tuning the AI method parameters (opaque to clinicians) so as to best approximate the kinds of outputs most useful to medical practitioners. We present some data from a sample of 379 patients that illustrate several evidence patterns we may expect in real healthcare situations. The majority (79.7%) of our patients show consistent evidence suggesting this biomarker approach may be reasonable. We also found five patterns of inconsistent evidence. These suggest a direction for further exploration. Finally, we sketch out an approach for collecting medical experts’ guidance as to the way the combined evidence might be presented so as to provide the most useful guidance (also needed for any optimization approach). We recognize that one possible outcome may be that all this approach may be able to provide is a quantified measure of the extent to which the evidence is consistent or not, leaving the final decision to the clinicians (where it must reside). Pointers to additional sources of evidence might also be possible in some situations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于疼痛评估的贝叶斯网络概念(预印本)
非结构性疼痛是一种主观现象,主要由身体、生理或社会影响引起/感知。目前,最常用的疼痛测量方法依赖于在离散评分表上自我报告疼痛水平。这提供了疼痛的主观且仅有半定量的指标。本文提出了一种方法,将自我报告的疼痛与疼痛相关的生物标志物相结合,从生物传感器(正在开发中)和可能的其他证据来源中获得,以提供对体验疼痛的更可靠估计,这是一种临床决策支持系统。我们使用贝叶斯网络来说明该方法,但也描述了其他提供其他方法来组合证据的人工智能(AI)方法。我们还提出了一种优化人工智能方法参数的方法(对临床医生来说是不透明的),以便最好地近似对医生最有用的输出类型。我们从379名患者的样本中提供了一些数据,这些数据说明了我们在实际医疗情况下可能预期的几种证据模式。我们的大多数(79.7%)患者显示出一致的证据,表明这种生物标志物方法可能是合理的。我们还发现了五种不一致的证据模式。这些都为进一步探索指明了方向。最后,我们概述了一种收集医学专家指导的方法,以提供最有用的指导(任何优化方法都需要)。我们认识到,一个可能的结果可能是,所有这些方法可能能够提供的是对证据一致性或不一致性程度的量化衡量,将最终决定权留给临床医生(必须驻留在哪里)。在某些情况下,指向其他证据来源也是可能的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Trends in South Korean Medical Device Development for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder: Narrative Review. Classifying Residual Stroke Severity Using Robotics-Assisted Stroke Rehabilitation: Machine Learning Approach. Assessing the Accuracy of Smartwatch-Based Estimation of Maximum Oxygen Uptake Using the Apple Watch Series 7: Validation Study. Agreement Between Apple Watch and Actical Step Counts in a Community Setting: Cross-Sectional Investigation From the Framingham Heart Study. Stroke Survivors' Interaction With Hand Rehabilitation Devices: Observational Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1