Classification of posttransfusion adverse events using a publicly available artificial intelligence system

Background Correct classification of transfusion reactions is important not only for effective patient care and donor management but also for accurate tracking of events in hemovigilance systems. We compared the ability of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system to correctly diagnose hypoth...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 2024-04, Vol.64 (4), p.590-596
Hauptverfasser: Fung, Mark K., AuBuchon, James P., Stephens, Laura D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 596
container_issue 4
container_start_page 590
container_title Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)
container_volume 64
creator Fung, Mark K.
AuBuchon, James P.
Stephens, Laura D.
description Background Correct classification of transfusion reactions is important not only for effective patient care and donor management but also for accurate tracking of events in hemovigilance systems. We compared the ability of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system to correctly diagnose hypothetical clinical situations as transfusion reactions in comparison to previous studies reporting the accuracy of transfusion medicine (TM) specialists in assessing these cases. Methods An AI system was requested to assess 36 case scenarios to provide a diagnosis, severity, and imputability of the transfusion reactions using the CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria. Responses were compared to an expert panel's classifications and to the published responses of a panel of TM specialists. Additionally, the AI's responses were compared to the TM specialists' prior attempts to use the TrDDx web‐based algorithm for the five most challenging cases. Results The AI's classification accuracy varied widely depending on the NHSN category. The AI accurately classified all transfusion‐associated circulatory overload and transfusion‐related acute lung injury cases, exceeding TM specialists' assessments. Conversely, it did not correctly identify any cases in select NHSN categories such as DSTR. Overall accuracy among all diagnostic categories was 48.7% for AI responses versus 72.1% for prior TM specialist responses (p = 0.005). AI‐generated responses included non‐standard terminology, limited severity assessments, and no imputability determinations. Discussion A generative AI system may have a role in helping healthcare providers to consider transfusion reaction categories that might be missed, but caution is advised in applying the AI's output to transfusion reaction classification at present.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/trf.17702
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3035538753</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3034772684</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3482-887b96cfc3abb79c53a1761459eb45d6067e64deab2d5d0e2d539f26ff3b2dad3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kcFq3DAQhkVpaDZpD32BIOglOTiRLMuyj2FpkkKgENKzGcujoEVrbzXyln37aLNJD4HMQQM_Hx-Dfsa-S3Ep81yl6C6lMaL8xBZSK1OUbas_s4UQlSykVOUxOyFaCSHKVsgv7Fg1lRDGmAVbLQMQeectJD-NfHJ8M1FKEUZyM-0jGLYYCTlucUzEczg-ceCbuQ_ehh2HLfgAfUAOMe1NHgL3Y8IQ_BOOFjntKOH6KztyEAi_ve5T9ufm5-Pyrrj_fftreX1fWFU1ZdE0pm9r66yCvjet1QqkqWWlW-wrPdSiNlhXA0JfDnoQmF_VurJ2TuUEBnXKzg_eTZz-zkipW3uy-RoYcZqpU0JprRqjVUZ_vENX0xzHfN2eqowp66bK1MWBsnEiiui6TfRriLtOim5fQJcL6F4KyOzZq3Hu1zj8J99-PANXB-CfD7j72NQ9PtwclM8TjZG6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3034772684</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Classification of posttransfusion adverse events using a publicly available artificial intelligence system</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Fung, Mark K. ; AuBuchon, James P. ; Stephens, Laura D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fung, Mark K. ; AuBuchon, James P. ; Stephens, Laura D.</creatorcontrib><description>Background Correct classification of transfusion reactions is important not only for effective patient care and donor management but also for accurate tracking of events in hemovigilance systems. We compared the ability of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system to correctly diagnose hypothetical clinical situations as transfusion reactions in comparison to previous studies reporting the accuracy of transfusion medicine (TM) specialists in assessing these cases. Methods An AI system was requested to assess 36 case scenarios to provide a diagnosis, severity, and imputability of the transfusion reactions using the CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria. Responses were compared to an expert panel's classifications and to the published responses of a panel of TM specialists. Additionally, the AI's responses were compared to the TM specialists' prior attempts to use the TrDDx web‐based algorithm for the five most challenging cases. Results The AI's classification accuracy varied widely depending on the NHSN category. The AI accurately classified all transfusion‐associated circulatory overload and transfusion‐related acute lung injury cases, exceeding TM specialists' assessments. Conversely, it did not correctly identify any cases in select NHSN categories such as DSTR. Overall accuracy among all diagnostic categories was 48.7% for AI responses versus 72.1% for prior TM specialist responses (p = 0.005). AI‐generated responses included non‐standard terminology, limited severity assessments, and no imputability determinations. Discussion A generative AI system may have a role in helping healthcare providers to consider transfusion reaction categories that might be missed, but caution is advised in applying the AI's output to transfusion reaction classification at present.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1132</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/trf.17702</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38400777</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Algorithms ; Artificial Intelligence ; Assessments ; Categories ; Classification ; Generative artificial intelligence ; Health care ; Health Facilities ; Health Personnel ; hemovigilance ; Humans ; Terminology ; Transfusion ; Transfusion Reaction ; transfusion reactions</subject><ispartof>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2024-04, Vol.64 (4), p.590-596</ispartof><rights>2024 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AABB.</rights><rights>2024 The Authors. Transfusion published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AABB.</rights><rights>2024. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3482-887b96cfc3abb79c53a1761459eb45d6067e64deab2d5d0e2d539f26ff3b2dad3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6081-4151 ; 0000-0002-9101-9326</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Ftrf.17702$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Ftrf.17702$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38400777$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fung, Mark K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AuBuchon, James P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stephens, Laura D.</creatorcontrib><title>Classification of posttransfusion adverse events using a publicly available artificial intelligence system</title><title>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</title><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><description>Background Correct classification of transfusion reactions is important not only for effective patient care and donor management but also for accurate tracking of events in hemovigilance systems. We compared the ability of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system to correctly diagnose hypothetical clinical situations as transfusion reactions in comparison to previous studies reporting the accuracy of transfusion medicine (TM) specialists in assessing these cases. Methods An AI system was requested to assess 36 case scenarios to provide a diagnosis, severity, and imputability of the transfusion reactions using the CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria. Responses were compared to an expert panel's classifications and to the published responses of a panel of TM specialists. Additionally, the AI's responses were compared to the TM specialists' prior attempts to use the TrDDx web‐based algorithm for the five most challenging cases. Results The AI's classification accuracy varied widely depending on the NHSN category. The AI accurately classified all transfusion‐associated circulatory overload and transfusion‐related acute lung injury cases, exceeding TM specialists' assessments. Conversely, it did not correctly identify any cases in select NHSN categories such as DSTR. Overall accuracy among all diagnostic categories was 48.7% for AI responses versus 72.1% for prior TM specialist responses (p = 0.005). AI‐generated responses included non‐standard terminology, limited severity assessments, and no imputability determinations. Discussion A generative AI system may have a role in helping healthcare providers to consider transfusion reaction categories that might be missed, but caution is advised in applying the AI's output to transfusion reaction classification at present.</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Artificial Intelligence</subject><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Generative artificial intelligence</subject><subject>Health care</subject><subject>Health Facilities</subject><subject>Health Personnel</subject><subject>hemovigilance</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><subject>Transfusion</subject><subject>Transfusion Reaction</subject><subject>transfusion reactions</subject><issn>0041-1132</issn><issn>1537-2995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kcFq3DAQhkVpaDZpD32BIOglOTiRLMuyj2FpkkKgENKzGcujoEVrbzXyln37aLNJD4HMQQM_Hx-Dfsa-S3Ep81yl6C6lMaL8xBZSK1OUbas_s4UQlSykVOUxOyFaCSHKVsgv7Fg1lRDGmAVbLQMQeectJD-NfHJ8M1FKEUZyM-0jGLYYCTlucUzEczg-ceCbuQ_ehh2HLfgAfUAOMe1NHgL3Y8IQ_BOOFjntKOH6KztyEAi_ve5T9ufm5-Pyrrj_fftreX1fWFU1ZdE0pm9r66yCvjet1QqkqWWlW-wrPdSiNlhXA0JfDnoQmF_VurJ2TuUEBnXKzg_eTZz-zkipW3uy-RoYcZqpU0JprRqjVUZ_vENX0xzHfN2eqowp66bK1MWBsnEiiui6TfRriLtOim5fQJcL6F4KyOzZq3Hu1zj8J99-PANXB-CfD7j72NQ9PtwclM8TjZG6</recordid><startdate>202404</startdate><enddate>202404</enddate><creator>Fung, Mark K.</creator><creator>AuBuchon, James P.</creator><creator>Stephens, Laura D.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6081-4151</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9101-9326</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202404</creationdate><title>Classification of posttransfusion adverse events using a publicly available artificial intelligence system</title><author>Fung, Mark K. ; AuBuchon, James P. ; Stephens, Laura D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3482-887b96cfc3abb79c53a1761459eb45d6067e64deab2d5d0e2d539f26ff3b2dad3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Artificial Intelligence</topic><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Generative artificial intelligence</topic><topic>Health care</topic><topic>Health Facilities</topic><topic>Health Personnel</topic><topic>hemovigilance</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><topic>Transfusion</topic><topic>Transfusion Reaction</topic><topic>transfusion reactions</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fung, Mark K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AuBuchon, James P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stephens, Laura D.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fung, Mark K.</au><au>AuBuchon, James P.</au><au>Stephens, Laura D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Classification of posttransfusion adverse events using a publicly available artificial intelligence system</atitle><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><date>2024-04</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>590</spage><epage>596</epage><pages>590-596</pages><issn>0041-1132</issn><eissn>1537-2995</eissn><abstract>Background Correct classification of transfusion reactions is important not only for effective patient care and donor management but also for accurate tracking of events in hemovigilance systems. We compared the ability of a generative artificial intelligence (AI) system to correctly diagnose hypothetical clinical situations as transfusion reactions in comparison to previous studies reporting the accuracy of transfusion medicine (TM) specialists in assessing these cases. Methods An AI system was requested to assess 36 case scenarios to provide a diagnosis, severity, and imputability of the transfusion reactions using the CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) criteria. Responses were compared to an expert panel's classifications and to the published responses of a panel of TM specialists. Additionally, the AI's responses were compared to the TM specialists' prior attempts to use the TrDDx web‐based algorithm for the five most challenging cases. Results The AI's classification accuracy varied widely depending on the NHSN category. The AI accurately classified all transfusion‐associated circulatory overload and transfusion‐related acute lung injury cases, exceeding TM specialists' assessments. Conversely, it did not correctly identify any cases in select NHSN categories such as DSTR. Overall accuracy among all diagnostic categories was 48.7% for AI responses versus 72.1% for prior TM specialist responses (p = 0.005). AI‐generated responses included non‐standard terminology, limited severity assessments, and no imputability determinations. Discussion A generative AI system may have a role in helping healthcare providers to consider transfusion reaction categories that might be missed, but caution is advised in applying the AI's output to transfusion reaction classification at present.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>38400777</pmid><doi>10.1111/trf.17702</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6081-4151</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9101-9326</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0041-1132
ispartof Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2024-04, Vol.64 (4), p.590-596
issn 0041-1132
1537-2995
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3035538753
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Accuracy
Algorithms
Artificial Intelligence
Assessments
Categories
Classification
Generative artificial intelligence
Health care
Health Facilities
Health Personnel
hemovigilance
Humans
Terminology
Transfusion
Transfusion Reaction
transfusion reactions
title Classification of posttransfusion adverse events using a publicly available artificial intelligence system
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T17%3A46%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Classification%20of%20posttransfusion%20adverse%20events%20using%20a%20publicly%20available%20artificial%20intelligence%20system&rft.jtitle=Transfusion%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.)&rft.au=Fung,%20Mark%20K.&rft.date=2024-04&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=590&rft.epage=596&rft.pages=590-596&rft.issn=0041-1132&rft.eissn=1537-2995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/trf.17702&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3034772684%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3034772684&rft_id=info:pmid/38400777&rfr_iscdi=true