Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
BMC Health Serv Res ; 24(1): 178, 2024 Feb 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38331778

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The aim of this systematic review was to examine the relationship between strategies to improve care delivery for older adults in ED and evaluation measures of patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, and system performance. METHODS: A systematic review of English language studies published since inception to December 2022, available from CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and Scopus was conducted. Studies were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers and included if they met the following criteria: participant mean age of ≥ 65 years; ED setting or directly influenced provision of care in the ED; reported on improvement interventions and strategies; reported patient outcomes, patient experience, staff experience, or system performance. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by pairs of independent reviewers using The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Data were synthesised using a hermeneutic approach. RESULTS: Seventy-six studies were included in the review, incorporating strategies for comprehensive assessment and multi-faceted care (n = 32), targeted care such as management of falls risk, functional decline, or pain management (n = 27), medication safety (n = 5), and trauma care (n = 12). We found a misalignment between comprehensive care delivered in ED for older adults and ED performance measures oriented to rapid assessment and referral. Eight (10.4%) studies reported patient experience and five (6.5%) reported staff experience. CONCLUSION: It is crucial that future strategies to improve care delivery in ED align the needs of older adults with the purpose of the ED system to ensure sustainable improvement effort and critical functioning of the ED as an interdependent component of the health system. Staff and patient input at the design stage may advance prioritisation of higher-impact interventions aligned with the pace of change and illuminate experience measures. More consistent reporting of interventions would inform important contextual factors and allow for replication.

3.
Stud Health Technol Inform ; 310: 1522-1523, 2024 Jan 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38269726

ABSTRACT

Implementing ethics is a complex issue and should engage stakeholders. Yet, ensuring a fair, transparent, and meaningful participatory process contributes to the complexity. This qualitative study explores how to engage with stakeholders about a COVID-19 AI app following principles of Critical Systems Thinking. The study is set to explore both process and outcomes of stakeholder engagement and draw recommendations for both.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Qualitative Research , Stakeholder Participation , Systems Analysis
4.
PLoS One ; 18(11): e0288448, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37917735

ABSTRACT

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been applied to a range of applications in healthcare and public health such as case identification or monitoring of the population. The urgency of the situation should not be to the detriment of considering the ethical implications of such apps. Implementing ethics in medical AI is a complex issue calling for a systems thinking approach engaging diverse representatives of the stakeholders in a consultative process. The participatory engagement aims to gather the different perspectives of the stakeholders about the app in a transparent and inclusive way. In this study, we engaged a group of clinicians, patients, and AI developers in conversations about a fictitious app which was an aggregate of actual COVID-19 apps. The app featured a COVID-19 symptoms monitoring function for both the patient and the clinician, as well as infection clusters tracking for health agencies. Anchored in Soft Systems Methodology and Critical Systems Thinking, participants were asked to map the flow of knowledge between the clinician, the patient, and the AI app system and answer questions about the ethical boundaries of the system. Because data and information are the resource and the product of the AI app, understanding the nature of the information and knowledge exchanged between the different agents of the system can reveal ethical issues. In this study, not only the output of the participatory process was analysed, but the process of the stakeholders' engagement itself was studied as well. To establish a strong foundation for the implementation of ethics in the AI app, the conversations among stakeholders need to be inclusive, respectful and allow for free and candid dialogues ensuring that the process is transparent for which a systemic intervention is well suited.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , COVID-19 , Humans , Knowledge , Qualitative Research , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communication
5.
Stud Health Technol Inform ; 304: 101-102, 2023 Jun 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37347579

ABSTRACT

Implementing ethics is a complex problem requiring stakeholders engagement. Engaging in fair and transparent way with stakeholders is part of the complexity. This qualitative study applies principles and techniques of Critical Systems Thinking while engaging with stakeholders in the context of implementing ethics for a COVID-19 AI. In a reflexive manner, the study examines the participatory process and its output leading to recommendations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Qualitative Research , Artificial Intelligence
6.
Sci Eng Ethics ; 27(5): 61, 2021 09 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34480239

ABSTRACT

A number of Artificial Intelligence (AI) ethics frameworks have been published in the last 6 years in response to the growing concerns posed by the adoption of AI in different sectors, including healthcare. While there is a strong culture of medical ethics in healthcare applications, AI-based Healthcare Applications (AIHA) are challenging the existing ethics and regulatory frameworks. This scoping review explores how ethics frameworks have been implemented in AIHA, how these implementations have been evaluated and whether they have been successful. AI specific ethics frameworks in healthcare appear to have a limited adoption and they are mostly used in conjunction with other ethics frameworks. The operationalisation of ethics frameworks is a complex endeavour with challenges at different levels: ethics principles, design, technology, organisational, and regulatory. Strategies identified in this review are proactive, contextual, technological, checklist, organisational and/or evidence-based approaches. While interdisciplinary approaches show promises, how an ethics framework is implemented in an AI-based Healthcare Application is not widely reported, and there is a need for transparency for trustworthy AI.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , Delivery of Health Care , Ethics, Medical , Organizations , Technology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...