Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association最新文献

Objectives: To explore the complexities of eliminating race correction in clinical artificial intelligence (AI), the pitfalls of naive solutions, and to propose systematic strategies for equitable model development.

Background and significance: Race correction in clinical AI, as in traditional medicine, introduces biases with potentially harmful consequences. Simple removal of race from models is insufficient due to the lasting influence of historically biased data.

Approach: We analyze 4 standardized scenarios to demonstrate how race correction manifests in clinical AI: use of race-corrected variables, explicit inclusion of race, inference via proxy variables, and use of race-specific models.

Results: For each scenario, the intuitive solution to removing race correction fails to eliminate bias, often due to legacy effects embedded in the data. More thoughtful approaches are required.

Discussion: Ending race correction in clinical AI requires deliberate, context-sensitive interventions, inclusion of diverse stakeholders, and strategies to make model reasoning more transparent and auditable.

Objectives: Accurate triage in emergency departments (ED) is critical for appropriate resource allocation. While artificial intelligence (AI) has been explored for triage, prior models relied on summarized clinical scenarios. We aimed to develop and evaluate large language models (LLMs) trained on real-world clinical conversations to classify patient urgency.

Materials and methods: We used a nationally curated dataset of anonymized triage-level conversations from 3 tertiary Korean hospitals. Two BERT-based models were developed to classify urgency per the Korean Triage and Acuity Scale (KTAS) into urgent (KTAS 3) or non-urgent (KTAS 4-5). One model tokenized the entire conversation, while the other applied a hierarchical structure with sentence-level tokenization and speaker-role embeddings. Performance metrics included accuracy, precision, recall, and F1-score. We compared our models against ChatGPT GPT-4o and ClinicalBERT, and assessed explainability using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP).

Results: A total of 5244 clinical conversations, 1057 triage-level dialogues were used, with 950 for training and 107 for testing. Our model with hierarchical structure achieved accuracies of 75.94%, significantly outperforming ChatGPT (56.68%) or fine-tuned ClinicalBERT (69.42%). For urgent cases, the best model achieved a recall of 0.9610, outperforming ChatGPT (0.5352). SHapley Additive exPlanations analysis confirmed that our model focused on clinically relevant cues aligned with KTAS criteria.

Conclusion: BERT-based LLMs trained on real-world ED conversations significantly outperform general-purpose models like ChatGPT in triage accuracy. This approach demonstrates the potential for enhancing clinical decision support with interpretable and efficient AI.

Objective: Artificial intelligence (AI) has impacted healthcare at urban and academic medical centers in the US. There are concerns, however, that the promise of AI may not be realized in rural communities. This scoping review aims to determine the extent of AI research in the rural US.

Materials and methods: We conducted a scoping review following the PRISMA guidelines. We included peer-reviewed, original research studies indexed in PubMed, Embase, and WebOfScience after January 1, 2010 and through April 29, 2025. Studies were required to discuss the development, implementation, or evaluation of AI tools in rural US healthcare, including frameworks that help facilitate AI development (eg, data warehouses).

Results: Our search strategy found 26 studies meeting inclusion criteria after full text screening with 14 papers discussing predictive AI models and 12 papers discussing data or research infrastructure. AI models most often targeted resource allocation and distribution. Few studies explored model deployment and impact. Half noted the lack of data and analytic resources as a limitation. None of the studies discussed examples of generative AI being trained, evaluated, or deployed in a rural setting.

Discussion: Practical limitations may be influencing and limiting the types of AI models evaluated in the rural US. Validation of tools in the rural US was underwhelming.

Conclusion: With few studies moving beyond AI model design and development stages, there are clear gaps in our understanding of how to reliably validate, deploy, and sustain AI models in rural settings to advance health in all communities.

Objective: Electronic health records (EHRs) lack a widely adopted standard for recording transgender and gender diverse (TGD) status, complicating research on TGD health. Computational models have been developed to identify TGD individuals in EHRs; however, gaps remain in understanding which components contribute to stronger phenotyping approaches. This scoping review evaluates EHR-based models for identifying TGD individuals, focusing on identifier types, performance, external validation, and ethical reporting to guide best practices.

Materials and methods: We searched PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Embase for peer-reviewed articles published before January 2024, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Included studies used EHR data to identify TGD individuals, verified TGD status, reported or allowed calculation of positive predictive value (PPV), and listed identifiers. Two authors screened and extracted data. We categorized models by data type and logic (structured, unstructured, and multimodal), summarized PPV distributions, and synthesized author-reported ethical considerations.

Results: Fourteen studies describing 50 models met inclusion criteria. Models using TGD-related diagnostic codes alone (n = 11) or requiring both structured and unstructured data (n = 6) showed the highest mean PPVs (85.3% and 97.1%). Models validated on larger confirmed TGD cohorts reported more stable performance, but external validation was rare. Most studies minimally addressed ethics; only 3 described protective measures or stakeholder engagement.

Discussion: Phenotyping of TGD individuals in EHR data remains heterogeneous in design and ethical transparency. Reported PPVs should be interpreted cautiously, as performance is influenced by study design, sample size, and verification methods.

Conclusions: Our recommendations emphasize the components that strengthen phenotyping approaches-identifier choice, multimodal intersection logic, validation practices, and ethical safeguards-rather than endorsing any single model.

Introduction: We created a probabilistic maternal-child electronic health record (EHR) linkage algorithm to promote clinical research in maternal-child health.

Methods: We used EHR data from 1994 to 2024 to create an XGBoost model to predict maternal-child linkages. The model used standard EHR elements as predictor variables, including first name, last name, birthdate, address, phone number, email, and an EHR-embedded maternal-child indicator as the deterministic outcome.

Results: From 82 million unique records, 6.2 billion potential pairs met blocking criteria. Of the potential pairs, 33 364 674 contained the deterministic indicator and were used as cases, and an equal number of controls were randomly sampled. The final model obtained an accuracy of 92%, a precision of 98%, a recall of 87%, and an F1-score of 92%.

Conclusion: We derived and validated a probabilistic maternal-child linkage algorithm using routinely collected EHR data elements that could benefit future observational research in maternal-child health.