RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technology design and development continues to be rapid, despite major limitations in its current form as a practice and discipline to address all sociohumanitarian issues and complexities. From these limitations emerges an imperative to strengthen AI and ML literacy in underserved communities and build a more diverse AI and ML design and development workforce engaged in health research. OBJECTIVE: AI and ML has the potential to account for and assess a variety of factors that contribute to health and disease and to improve prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. Here, we describe recent activities within the Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning Consortium to Advance Health Equity and Researcher Diversity (AIM-AHEAD) Ethics and Equity Workgroup (EEWG) that led to the development of deliverables that will help put ethics and fairness at the forefront of AI and ML applications to build equity in biomedical research, education, and health care. METHODS: The AIM-AHEAD EEWG was created in 2021 with 3 cochairs and 51 members in year 1 and 2 cochairs and ~40 members in year 2. Members in both years included AIM-AHEAD principal investigators, coinvestigators, leadership fellows, and research fellows. The EEWG used a modified Delphi approach using polling, ranking, and other exercises to facilitate discussions around tangible steps, key terms, and definitions needed to ensure that ethics and fairness are at the forefront of AI and ML applications to build equity in biomedical research, education, and health care. RESULTS: The EEWG developed a set of ethics and equity principles, a glossary, and an interview guide. The ethics and equity principles comprise 5 core principles, each with subparts, which articulate best practices for working with stakeholders from historically and presently underrepresented communities. The glossary contains 12 terms and definitions, with particular emphasis on optimal development, refinement, and implementation of AI and ML in health equity research. To accompany the glossary, the EEWG developed a concept relationship diagram that describes the logical flow of and relationship between the definitional concepts. Lastly, the interview guide provides questions that can be used or adapted to garner stakeholder and community perspectives on the principles and glossary. CONCLUSIONS: Ongoing engagement is needed around our principles and glossary to identify and predict potential limitations in their uses in AI and ML research settings, especially for institutions with limited resources. This requires time, careful consideration, and honest discussions around what classifies an engagement incentive as meaningful to support and sustain their full engagement. By slowing down to meet historically and presently underresourced institutions and communities where they are and where they are capable of engaging and competing, there is higher potential to achieve needed diversity, ethics, and equity in AI and ML implementation in health research.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Healthcare organizations need to rapidly adapt to new technology, policy changes, evolving payment strategies, and other environmental changes. We report on the development and application of a structured methodology to support technology and process improvement in healthcare organizations, Systematic Iterative Organizational Diagnostics (SIOD). SIOD was designed to evaluate clinical work practices, diagnose technology and workflow issues, and recommend potential solutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SIOD consists of five stages: (1) Background Scan, (2) Engagement Building, (3) Data Acquisition, (4) Data Analysis, and (5) Reporting and Debriefing. Our team applied the SIOD approach in two ambulatory clinics and an integrated ambulatory care center and used SIOD components during an evaluation of a large-scale health information technology transition. RESULTS: During the initial SIOD application in two ambulatory clinics, five major analysis themes were identified, grounded in the data: putting patients first, reducing the chaos, matching space to function, technology making work harder, and staffing is more than numbers. Additional themes were identified based on SIOD application to a multidisciplinary clinical center. The team also developed contextually grounded recommendations to address issues identified through applying SIOD. DISCUSSION: The SIOD methodology fills a problem identification gap in existing process improvement systems through an emphasis on issue discovery, holistic clinic functionality, and inclusion of diverse perspectives. SIOD can diagnose issues where approaches as Lean, Six Sigma, and other organizational interventions can be applied. CONCLUSION: The complex structure of work and technology in healthcare requires specialized diagnostic strategies to identify and resolve issues, and SIOD fills this need.
