Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Pharmacists’ perceptions of a machine learning model for the identification of atypical medication orders
26
Zitationen
7
Autoren
2021
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The study sought to assess the clinical performance of a machine learning model aiming to identify unusual medication orders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was conducted at CHU Sainte-Justine, Canada, from April to August 2020. An unsupervised machine learning model based on GANomaly and 2 baselines were trained to learn medication order patterns from 10 years of data. Clinical pharmacists dichotomously (typical or atypical) labeled orders and pharmacological profiles (patients' medication lists). Confusion matrices, areas under the precision-recall curve (AUPRs), and F1 scores were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 12 471 medication orders and 1356 profiles were labeled by 25 pharmacists. Medication order predictions showed a precision of 35%, recall (sensitivity) of 26%, and specificity of 97% as compared with pharmacist labels, with an AUPR of 0.25 and an F1 score of 0.30. Profile predictions showed a precision of 49%, recall of 75%, and specificity of 82%, with an AUPR of 0.60, and an F1 score of 0.59. The model performed better than the baselines. According to the pharmacists, the model was a useful screening tool, and 9 of 15 participants preferred predictions by medication, rather than by profile. DISCUSSION: Predictions for profiles had higher F1 scores and recall compared with medication order predictions. Although the performance was much better for profile predictions, pharmacists generally preferred medication order predictions. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the AUPR, this model showed better performance for the identification of atypical pharmacological profiles than for medication orders. Pharmacists considered the model a useful screening tool. Improving these predictions should be prioritized in future research to maximize clinical impact.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
"Why Should I Trust You?"
2016 · 14.732 Zit.
Coding Algorithms for Defining Comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 Administrative Data
2005 · 10.547 Zit.
A Comprehensive Survey on Graph Neural Networks
2020 · 8.949 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.550 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 8.061 Zit.