Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34790960›Full record

ArticleAI and ethics2022

Methodology for integrating artificial intelligence in healthcare systems: learning from COVID-19 to prepare for Disease X.

Petar Radanliev, David De Roure, Carsten Maple, Uchenna Ani

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AI and ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Petar RadanlievDepartment of Engineering Sciences, Oxford e-Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5629-6857
David De RoureDepartment of Engineering Sciences, Oxford e-Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Carsten MapleWMG Cyber Security Centre, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Uchenna AniSTEaPP, Faculty of Engineering Science, University College London, London, UK.
University of Oxford · GBFaculty (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence and edge devices have been used at an increased rate in managing the COVID-19 pandemic. In this article we review the lessons learned from COVID-19 to postulate possible solutions for a Disease X event. The overall purpose of the study and the research problems investigated is the integration of artificial intelligence function in digital healthcare systems. The basic design of the study includes a systematic state-of-the-art review, followed by an evaluation of different approaches to managing global pandemics. The study design then engages with constructing a new methodology for integrating algorithms in healthcare systems, followed by analysis of the new methodology and a discussion. Action research is applied to review existing state of the art, and a qualitative case study method is used to analyse the knowledge acquired from the COVID-19 pandemic. Major trends found as a result of the study derive from the synthesis of COVID-19 knowledge, presenting new insights in the form of a conceptual methodology-that includes six phases for managing a future Disease X event, resulting with a summary map of various problems, solutions and expected results from integrating functional AI in healthcare systems.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceCovid-19Disease XEdge devicesHealthcare systemsInternet-of-things (IoT)

Identifiers

PMID34790960
PMCPMC8525053
OpenAlexW3205446535

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.