Prevalence, mortality, cost, and disparities in transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement in cancer patients: Artificial intelligence and propensity score national 5-year analysis of 7495 procedures.

INTRODUCTION: We conducted the first comprehensive evaluation of the therapeutic value and safety profile of transcatheter mitral edge-to-edge repair (TEER) and transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) in individuals concurrently afflicted with cancer. METHODS: Utilizing the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) dataset, we analyzed all adult hospitalizations between 2016 and 2020 (n = 148,755,036). The inclusion criteria for this retrospectively analyzed prospective cohort study were all adult hospitalizations (age 18 years and older). Regression and machine learning analyses in addition to model optimization were conducted using ML-PSr (Machine Learning-augmented Propensity Score adjusted multivariable regression) and BAyesian Machine learning-augmented Propensity Score (BAM-PS) multivariable regression. RESULTS: Of all adult hospitalizations, there were 5790 (0.004%) TMVRs and 1705 (0.001%) TEERs. Of the total TMVRs, 160 (2.76%) were done in active cancer. Of the total TEERs, 30 (1.76%) were done in active cancer. After the comparable rates of TEER/TMVR in active cancer in 2016, the prevalence of TEER/TMVR was significantly less in active cancer from 2017 to 2020 (2.61% versus 7.28% p < 0.001). From 2017 to 2020, active cancer significantly decreased the odds of receiving TEER or TMVR (OR 0.28, 95%CI 0.13-0.68, p = 0.008). In patients with active cancer who underwent TMVR/TEER, there were no significant differences in socio-economic disparities, mortality or total hospitalization costs. CONCLUSION: The presence of malignancy does not contribute to increased mortality, length of stay or procedural costs in TMVR or TEER. Whereas the prevalence of TMVR has increased in patients with active cancer, the utilization of TEER in the context of active cancer is declining despite a growing patient population.

Supporting equitable and responsible highway safety improvement funding allocation strategies - Why AI prediction biases matter.

The existing methodologies for allocating highway safety improvement funding closely rely on the utilization of crash prediction models. Specifically, these models produce predictions that estimate future crash hazard levels in different geographical areas, which subsequently support the future funding allocation strategies. In recent years, there is a burgeoning interest in applying artificial intelligence (AI)-based models to perform crash prediction tasks. Despite the remarkable accuracy of these AI-based crash prediction models, they have been observed to yield biased prediction outcomes across areas of different socioeconomic statuses. These biases are primarily attributed to the inherent measurement and representation biases of AI-based prediction models. More precisely, measurement bias arises from the selection of target variables to reflect crash hazard levels, while representation bias results from the issue of imbalanced number of samples representing areas with different socioeconomic statuses within the dataset. Consequently, these biased prediction outcomes have the potential to perpetuate an unfair allocation of funding resources, contributing to worsen social inequality over time. Drawing upon a real-world case study in North Carolina, this study designs an AI-based crash prediction model that utilizes previous sociodemographic and crash-related variables to predict future severe crash rate of each area to reflect the crash hazardous level. By incorporating a fair regression framework, this study endeavors to transform the crash prediction model to become both fair and accurate, aiming to support equitable and responsible safety improvement funding allocation strategies.

A systematic review of economic evaluation of artificial intelligence-based screening for eye diseases: From possibility to reality.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a focus of research in the rapidly evolving field of ophthalmology. Nevertheless, there is a lack of systematic studies on the health economics of AI in this field. We examine studies from the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases that employed quantitative analysis, retrieved up to July 2023. Most of the studies indicate that AI leads to cost savings and improved efficiency in ophthalmology. On the other hand, some studies suggest that using AI in healthcare may raise costs for patients, especially when taking into account factors such as labor costs, infrastructure, and patient adherence. Future research should cover a wider range of ophthalmic diseases beyond common eye conditions. Moreover, conducting extensive health economic research, designed to collect data relevant to its own context, is imperative.

Assessing the Economic Value of Clinical Artificial Intelligence: Challenges and Opportunities.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical artificial intelligence (AI) is a novel technology, and few economic evaluations have focused on it to date. Before its wider implementation, it is important to highlight the aspects of AI that challenge traditional health technology assessment methods. METHODS: We used an existing broad value framework to assess potential ways AI can provide good value for money. We also developed a rubric of how economic evaluations of AI should vary depending on the case of its use. RESULTS: We found that the measurement of core elements of value-health outcomes and cost-are complicated by AI because its generalizability across different populations is often unclear and because its use may necessitate reconfigured clinical processes. Clinicians' productivity may improve when AI is used. If poorly implemented though, AI may also cause clinicians' workload to increase. Some AI has been found to exacerbate health disparities. Nevertheless, AI may promote equity by expanding access to medical care and, when properly trained, providing unbiased diagnoses and prognoses. The approach to assessment of AI should vary based on its use case: AI that creates new clinical possibilities can improve outcomes, but regulation and evidence collection may be difficult; AI that extends clinical expertise can reduce disparities and lower costs but may result in overuse; and AI that automates clinicians' work can improve productivity but may reduce skills. CONCLUSIONS: The potential uses of clinical AI create challenges for health technology assessment methods originally developed for pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Health economists should be prepared to examine data collection and methods used to train AI, as these may impact its future value.

Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations Focused on Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: The Tortoise and the Cheetah.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to systematically review recent health economic evaluations (HEEs) of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare. The aim was to discuss pertinent methods, reporting quality and challenges for future implementation of AI in healthcare, and additionally advise future HEEs. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted in 2 databases (PubMed and Scopus) for articles published in the last 5 years. Two reviewers performed independent screening, full-text inclusion, data extraction, and appraisal. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards and Philips checklist were used for the quality assessment of included studies. RESULTS: A total of 884 unique studies were identified; 20 were included for full-text review, covering a wide range of medical specialties and care pathway phases. The most commonly evaluated type of AI was automated medical image analysis models (n = 9, 45%). The prevailing health economic analysis was cost minimization (n = 8, 40%) with the costs saved per case as preferred outcome measure. A total of 9 studies (45%) reported model-based HEEs, 4 of which applied a time horizon >1 year. The evidence supporting the chosen analytical methods, assessment of uncertainty, and model structures was underreported. The reporting quality of the articles was moderate as on average studies reported on 66% of Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards items. CONCLUSIONS: HEEs of AI in healthcare are limited and often focus on costs rather than health impact. Surprisingly, model-based long-term evaluations are just as uncommon as model-based short-term evaluations. Consequently, insight into the actual benefits offered by AI is lagging behind current technological developments.

Translatability Analysis of National Institutes of Health-Funded Biomedical Research That Applies Artificial Intelligence.

Importance: Despite the rapid growth of interest and diversity in applications of artificial intelligence (AI) to biomedical research, there are limited objective ways to characterize the potential for use of AI in clinical practice. Objective: To examine what types of medical AI have the greatest estimated translational impact (ie, ability to lead to development that has measurable value for human health) potential. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, research grants related to AI awarded between January 1, 1985, and December 31, 2020, were identified from a National Institutes of Health (NIH) award database. The text content for each award was entered into a Natural Language Processing (NLP) clustering algorithm. An NIH database was also used to extract citation data, including the number of citations and approximate potential to translate (APT) score for published articles associated with the granted awards to create proxies for translatability. Exposures: Unsupervised assignment of AI-related research awards to application topics using NLP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annualized citations per $1 million funding (ACOF) and average APT score for award-associated articles, grouped by application topic. The APT score is a machine-learning based metric created by the NIH Office of Portfolio Analysis that quantifies the likelihood of future citation by a clinical article. Results: A total of 16 629 NIH awards related to AI were included in the analysis, and 75 applications of AI were identified. Total annual funding for AI grew from $17.4 million in 1985 to $1.43 billion in 2020. By average APT, interpersonal communication technologies (0.488; 95% CI, 0.472-0.504) and population genetics (0.463; 95% CI, 0.453-0.472) had the highest translatability; environmental health (ACOF, 1038) and applications focused on the electronic health record (ACOF, 489) also had high translatability. The category of applications related to biochemical analysis was found to have low translatability by both metrics (average APT, 0.393; 95% CI, 0.388-0.398; ACOF, 246). Conclusions and Relevance: Based on this study's findings, data on grants from the NIH can apparently be used to identify and characterize medical applications of AI to understand changes in academic productivity, funding support, and potential for translational impact. This method may be extended to characterize other research domains.

Artificial Intelligence Assists the Construction of Quantitative Model for the High-Quality Development of Modern Enterprises.

Artificial intelligence companies are different from traditional labor-intensive and capital-intensive companies in that their core competitiveness lies in technology, knowledge, and manpower. Enterprises show the characteristics of a high proportion of intangible assets, strong profitability, and rapid growth. At the same time, there are also the characteristics of high risk and high uncertainty. In addition to the existing value brought by existing profitability, corporate value should also consider the potential value brought by potential profitability. Enterprise value is affected by many factors such as profitability, growth ability, innovation ability, and external environment. Traditional valuation techniques are often utilised to value artificial intelligence businesses in the present market. Traditional valuation methods ignore the dynamics and uncertainties of artificial intelligence enterprise value evaluation, make static and single predictions of future earnings, ignore the value of enterprise management flexibility, and are unable to assess the intrinsic value of artificial intelligence businesses. Based on the projection pursuit method, this paper constructs a modern high-quality development enterprise high-quality development evaluation model, uses real-code accelerated genetic algorithm to optimize the projection objective function, and calculates the best projection direction vector and projection value. The collected sample data can be imported into the evaluation model to calculate the comprehensive evaluation value of the high-quality development of modern high-quality development enterprises and the weights of various indicators included. By comparing the size of the comprehensive evaluation value, each sample can be calculated Evaluation of the level of high-quality development. The results show that the high-quality development level of China's overall economy is on the rise, but the level of development is still low, and there is a large gap between the development level of the eastern region and the central and western regions. Using the systematic generalized moment estimation method, empirically, we analyse the impact of artificial intelligence on the high-quality economic development. The results show that artificial intelligence at the national level and in the central and western regions will significantly promote high-quality economic development, while artificial intelligence in the eastern region has a significant inhibitory effect on high-quality economic development.

Cost-effectiveness of artificial intelligence monitoring for active tuberculosis treatment: A modeling study.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) incidence in Los Angeles County, California, USA (5.7 per 100,000) is significantly higher than the U.S. national average (2.9 per 100,000). Directly observed therapy (DOT) is the preferred strategy for active TB treatment but requires substantial resources. We partnered with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (LACDPH) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of AiCure, an artificial intelligence (AI) platform that allows for automated treatment monitoring. METHODS: We used a Markov model to compare DOT versus AiCure for active TB treatment in LA County. Each cohort transitioned between health states at rates estimated using data from a pilot study for AiCure (N = 43) and comparable historical controls for DOT (N = 71). We estimated total costs (2017, USD) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 16-month horizon to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and net monetary benefits (NMB) of AiCure. To assess robustness, we conducted deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). RESULTS: For the average patient, AiCure was dominant over DOT. DOT treatment cost $4,894 and generated 1.03 QALYs over 16-months. AiCure treatment cost $2,668 for 1.05 QALYs. At willingness-to-pay threshold of $150K/QALY, incremental NMB per-patient under AiCure was $4,973. In univariate DSA, NMB were most sensitive to monthly doses and vocational nurse wage; however, AiCure remained dominant. In PSA, AiCure was dominant in 93.5% of 10,000 simulations (cost-effective in 96.4%). CONCLUSIONS: AiCure for treatment of active TB is cost-effective for patients in LA County, California. Increased use of AI platforms in other jurisdictions could facilitate the CDC's vision of TB elimination.

Artificial intelligence-the future is now.

The pros and cons of artificial intelligence in assisted reproductive technology are presented.

Cost Effectiveness of an Electrocardiographic Deep Learning Algorithm to Detect Asymptomatic Left Ventricular Dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an artificial intelligence electrocardiogram (AI-ECG) algorithm under various clinical and cost scenarios when used for universal screening at age 65. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used decision analytic modeling to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the use of AI-ECG to screen for asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction (ALVD) once at age 65 compared with no screening. This screening consisted of an initial screening decision tree and subsequent construction of a Markov model. One-way sensitivity analysis on various disease and cost parameters to evaluate cost-effectiveness at both $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and $100,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. RESULTS: We found that for universal screening at age 65, the novel AI-ECG algorithm would cost $43,351 per QALY gained, test performance, disease characteristics, and testing cost parameters significantly affect cost-effectiveness, and screening at ages 55 and 75 would cost $48,649 and $52,072 per QALY gained, respectively. Overall, under most of the clinical scenarios modeled, coupled with its robust test performance in both testing and validation cohorts, screening with the novel AI-ECG algorithm appears to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000. CONCLUSION: Universal screening for ALVD with the novel AI-ECG appears to be cost-effective under most clinical scenarios with a cost of <$50,000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness is particularly sensitive to both the probability of disease progression and the cost of screening and downstream testing. To improve cost-effectiveness modeling, further study of the natural progression and treatment of ALVD and external validation of AI-ECG should be undertaken.