Cited by 114Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationElectronic Health Records SystemsTechnology and Human Factors in Education and Health

Artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support in modern medical physics: Selection, acceptance, commissioning, and quality assurance

Open access
Mahadevaiah, Geetha, RV, Prasad, Bermejo, Inigo, Jaffray, David, Dekker, Andre, Wee, Leonard·2020·Medical Physics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent advances in machine and deep learning based on an increased availability of clinical data have fueled renewed interest in computerized clinical decision support systems (CDSSs). CDSSs have shown great potential to improve healthcare, increase patient safety and reduce costs. However, the use of CDSSs is not without pitfalls, as an inadequate or faulty CDSS can potentially deteriorate the quality of healthcare and put patients at risk. In addition, the adoption of a CDSS might fail because its intended users ignore the output of the CDSS due to lack of trust, relevancy or actionability. AIM: In this article, we provide guidance based on literature for the different aspects involved in the adoption of a CDSS with a special focus on machine and deep learning based systems: selection, acceptance testing, commissioning, implementation and quality assurance. RESULTS: A rigorous selection process will help identify the CDSS that best fits the preferences and requirements of the local site. Acceptance testing will make sure that the selected CDSS fulfills the defined specifications and satisfies the safety requirements. The commissioning process will prepare the CDSS for safe clinical use at the local site. An effective implementation phase should result in an orderly roll out of the CDSS to the well-trained end-users whose expectations have been managed. And finally, quality assurance will make sure that the performance of the CDSS is maintained and that any issues are promptly identified and solved. CONCLUSION: We conclude that a systematic approach to the adoption of a CDSS will help avoid pitfalls, improve patient safety and increase the chances of success.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mp.13562

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [4]Shortliffe E. Computer‐Based Medical Consultations: MYCIN ‐ 1st Edition; 1976 [cited 2018 Dec 4]. Available from https://www.elsevier.com/books/computer-based-medical-consultations-mycin/shortliffe/978-0-444-00179-5
  2. [34]National Academy of Medicine. Optimizing Strategies for Clinical Decision Support; 2017 [cited 2019 Jan 9]. Available from https://nam.edu/optimizing-strategies-clinical-decision-support/ 37733888

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mahadevaiah, G., RV, P., Bermejo, I., Jaffray, D., Dekker, A., & Wee, L.
Affiliations
  • Philips Research India Bangalore 560045 India
  • Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW School for Oncology and Developmental Biology Maastricht University Medical Centre Maastricht 6229 ET Netherlands
  • University Health Network (CA)
  • Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
Venue
Medical Physics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-05
Volume
47
Issue
5
Pages
e228-e235
ISSN
  • 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
  • 2473-4209
OpenAlex
W3024513077
Cited by
114
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 4
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Physics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Technology and Human Factors in Education and Health
Keywords
clinical decision support systems, artificial intelligence, deep learning, machine learning, acceptance testing, commissioning, implementation, quality assurance, patient safety, trust in AI
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Humans, Physics, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Decision Support Systems, Clinical

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review