Rossella Di Bidino, Signe Daugbjerg, Sara C Papavero, Ira H Haraldsen, Americo Cicchetti, Dario Sacchini
{"title":"基于人工智能技术的健康技术评估框架。","authors":"Rossella Di Bidino, Signe Daugbjerg, Sara C Papavero, Ira H Haraldsen, Americo Cicchetti, Dario Sacchini","doi":"10.1017/S0266462324000308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI)-based health technologies (AIHTs) have already been applied in clinical practice. However, there is currently no standardized framework for evaluating them based on the principles of health technology assessment (HTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-round Delphi survey was distributed to a panel of experts to determine the significance of incorporating topics outlined in the EUnetHTA Core Model and twenty additional ones identified through literature reviews. Each panelist assigned scores to each topic. Topics were categorized as critical to include (scores 7-9), important but not critical (scores 4-6), and not important (scores 1-3). A 70 percent cutoff was used to determine high agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our panel of 46 experts indicated that 48 out of the 65 proposed topics are critical and should be included in an HTA framework for AIHTs. Among the ten most crucial topics, the following emerged: accuracy of the AI model (97.78 percent), patient safety (95.65 percent), benefit-harm balance evaluated from an ethical standpoint (95.56 percent), and bias in data (91.30 percent). Importantly, our findings highlight that the Core Model is insufficient in capturing all relevant topics for AI-based technologies, as 14 out of the additional 20 topics were identified as crucial.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It is imperative to determine the level of agreement on AI-relevant HTA topics to establish a robust assessment framework. This framework will play a foundational role in evaluating AI tools for the early diagnosis of dementia, which is the focus of the European project AI-Mind currently being developed.</p>","PeriodicalId":14467,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","volume":"40 1","pages":"e61"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health technology assessment framework for artificial intelligence-based technologies.\",\"authors\":\"Rossella Di Bidino, Signe Daugbjerg, Sara C Papavero, Ira H Haraldsen, Americo Cicchetti, Dario Sacchini\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0266462324000308\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI)-based health technologies (AIHTs) have already been applied in clinical practice. However, there is currently no standardized framework for evaluating them based on the principles of health technology assessment (HTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-round Delphi survey was distributed to a panel of experts to determine the significance of incorporating topics outlined in the EUnetHTA Core Model and twenty additional ones identified through literature reviews. Each panelist assigned scores to each topic. Topics were categorized as critical to include (scores 7-9), important but not critical (scores 4-6), and not important (scores 1-3). A 70 percent cutoff was used to determine high agreement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our panel of 46 experts indicated that 48 out of the 65 proposed topics are critical and should be included in an HTA framework for AIHTs. Among the ten most crucial topics, the following emerged: accuracy of the AI model (97.78 percent), patient safety (95.65 percent), benefit-harm balance evaluated from an ethical standpoint (95.56 percent), and bias in data (91.30 percent). Importantly, our findings highlight that the Core Model is insufficient in capturing all relevant topics for AI-based technologies, as 14 out of the additional 20 topics were identified as crucial.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It is imperative to determine the level of agreement on AI-relevant HTA topics to establish a robust assessment framework. This framework will play a foundational role in evaluating AI tools for the early diagnosis of dementia, which is the focus of the European project AI-Mind currently being developed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"e61\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462324000308\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462324000308","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Health technology assessment framework for artificial intelligence-based technologies.
Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based health technologies (AIHTs) have already been applied in clinical practice. However, there is currently no standardized framework for evaluating them based on the principles of health technology assessment (HTA).
Methods: A two-round Delphi survey was distributed to a panel of experts to determine the significance of incorporating topics outlined in the EUnetHTA Core Model and twenty additional ones identified through literature reviews. Each panelist assigned scores to each topic. Topics were categorized as critical to include (scores 7-9), important but not critical (scores 4-6), and not important (scores 1-3). A 70 percent cutoff was used to determine high agreement.
Results: Our panel of 46 experts indicated that 48 out of the 65 proposed topics are critical and should be included in an HTA framework for AIHTs. Among the ten most crucial topics, the following emerged: accuracy of the AI model (97.78 percent), patient safety (95.65 percent), benefit-harm balance evaluated from an ethical standpoint (95.56 percent), and bias in data (91.30 percent). Importantly, our findings highlight that the Core Model is insufficient in capturing all relevant topics for AI-based technologies, as 14 out of the additional 20 topics were identified as crucial.
Conclusion: It is imperative to determine the level of agreement on AI-relevant HTA topics to establish a robust assessment framework. This framework will play a foundational role in evaluating AI tools for the early diagnosis of dementia, which is the focus of the European project AI-Mind currently being developed.
期刊介绍:
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care serves as a forum for the wide range of health policy makers and professionals interested in the economic, social, ethical, medical and public health implications of health technology. It covers the development, evaluation, diffusion and use of health technology, as well as its impact on the organization and management of health care systems and public health. In addition to general essays and research reports, regular columns on technology assessment reports and thematic sections are published.