Duas coisas são infinitas: o universo e a estupidez humana. Mas, em relação ao universo, ainda não tenho a certeza absoluta.
(Einstein)
But the tune ends too soon for us all (Ian Anderson)
Advocates for artificial intelligence being used in healthcare say it will ease strain on resources and free up time for doctor-patient interaction Photograph: Eduard Muzhevskyi/Alamy Stock Photo
Artificial intelligence is on a par with human experts when it comes to making medical diagnoses based on images, a review has found.
However, experts have warned the latest findings are based on a small number of studies, since the field is littered with poor-quality research.
One burgeoning application is the use of AI in interpreting medical images – a field that relies on deep learning, a sophisticated form of machine learning in which a series of labelled images are fed into algorithms that pick out features within them and learn how to classify similar images. This approach has shown promise in diagnosis of diseases from cancers to eye conditions.
However questions remain about how such deep learning systems measure up to human skills. Now researchers say they have conducted the first comprehensive review of published studies on the issue, and found humans and machines are on a par.
Prof Alastair Denniston, at the University Hospitals Birmingham NHS foundation trust and a co-author of the study, said the results were encouraging but the study was a reality check for some of the hype about AI.
Dr Xiaoxuan Liu, the lead author of the study and from the same NHS trust, agreed. “There are a lot of headlines about AI outperforming humans, but our message is that it can at best be equivalent,” she said.
Writing in the Lancet Digital Health, Denniston, Liu and colleagues reported how they focused on research papers published since 2012 – a pivotal year for deep learning.
An initial search turned up more than 20,000 relevant studies. However, only 14 studies – all based on human disease – reported good quality data, tested the deep learning system with images from a separate dataset to the one used to train it, and showed the same images to human experts.
The team pooled the most promising results from within each of the 14 studies to reveal that deep learning systems correctly detected a disease state 87% of the time – compared with 86% for healthcare professionals – and correctly gave the all-clear 93% of the time, compared with 91% for human experts.
However, the healthcare professionals in these scenarios were not given additional patient information they would have in the real world which could steer their diagnosis.
Prof David Spiegelhalter, the chair of the Winton centre for risk and evidence communication at the University of Cambridge, said the field was awash with poor research.
“This excellent review demonstrates that the massive hype over AI in medicine obscures the lamentable quality of almost all evaluation studies,” he said. “Deep learning can be a powerful and impressive technique, but clinicians and commissioners should be asking the crucial question: what does it actually add to clinical practice?”
However, Denniston remained optimistic about the potential of AI in healthcare, saying such deep learning systems could act as a diagnostic tool and help tackle the backlog of scans and images. What’s more, said Liu, they could prove useful in places which lack experts to interpret images.
Liu said it would be important to use deep learning systems in clinical trials to assess whether patient outcomes improved compared with current practices.
Dr Raj Jena, an oncologist at Addenbrooke’s hospital in Cambridge who was not involved in the study, said deep learning systems would be important in the future, but stressed they needed robust real-world testing. He also said it was important to understand why such systems sometimes make the wrong assessment.
“If you are a deep learning algorithm, when you fail you can often fail in a very unpredictable and spectacular way,” he said.
Because this is the main issue! I mean, media and the lefties maniacs that are trying to impose their ideas to our societies, must be revealed with no taboos! And, without doubts, this is the main reason why right-wing extremist ideas are flourishing all around the world! Definitely!
Of course I must acknowledge that Bayan is the "best way-out" to oppose to Greta.
But we must keep the mind open! We musn't think by the media!! We must hear the media, BUT think on our own!
No Centro Comercial Pescador na Costa de Caparica. Nove lojas - NOVE!! - de "unhas de gel", "ateliers de estética", cabeleireiros e afins. Um número significativo de lojas fechado. Entre "Consultas de Tarot", "Academia de estudo", cursos de inglês.
Um espaço abandonado ou colonizado pelo supérfluo (com o respeito, mas sobretudo compreensão, que me merecem as correspondente profissões).
Enfim, mais uma morte (há muito!) anunciada. Em "Liquidação total"!
No meio disto tudo, o que é de espantar e de louvar, o grupo "Gandaia" a querer sobreviver...