Towards evidence-based practice 2.0: leveraging artificial intelligence in healthcare

被引:3
|
作者
Nilsen, Per [1 ,2 ]
Sundemo, David [3 ,4 ]
Heintz, Fredrik [5 ]
Neher, Margit [1 ]
Nygren, Jens [1 ]
Svedberg, Petra [1 ]
Petersson, Lena [1 ]
机构
[1] Halmstad Univ, Sch Hlth & Welf, Halmstad, Sweden
[2] Linkoping Univ, Dept Hlth Med & Caring Sci, Linkoping, Sweden
[3] Univ Gothenburg, Inst Med, Sahlgrenska Acad, Sch Publ Hlth & Community Med, Gothenburg, Sweden
[4] Lerum Narhalsan Primary Healthcare Ctr, Lerum, Sweden
[5] Linkoping Univ, Dept Comp & Informat Sci, Linkoping, Sweden
来源
FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES | 2024年 / 4卷
关键词
artificial intelligence; evidence-based practice; clinical decision-making; evidence; clinical experience; patient preferences; MEDICINE; BIAS; OPPORTUNITIES; RISK;
D O I
10.3389/frhs.2024.1368030
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Evidence-based practice (EBP) involves making clinical decisions based on three sources of information: evidence, clinical experience and patient preferences. Despite popularization of EBP, research has shown that there are many barriers to achieving the goals of the EBP model. The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has been proposed as a means to improve clinical decision-making. The aim of this paper was to pinpoint key challenges pertaining to the three pillars of EBP and to investigate the potential of AI in surmounting these challenges and contributing to a more evidence-based healthcare practice. We conducted a selective review of the literature on EBP and the integration of AI in healthcare to achieve this.Challenges with the three components of EBP Clinical decision-making in line with the EBP model presents several challenges. The availability and existence of robust evidence sometimes pose limitations due to slow generation and dissemination processes, as well as the scarcity of high-quality evidence. Direct application of evidence is not always viable because studies often involve patient groups distinct from those encountered in routine healthcare. Clinicians need to rely on their clinical experience to interpret the relevance of evidence and contextualize it within the unique needs of their patients. Moreover, clinical decision-making might be influenced by cognitive and implicit biases. Achieving patient involvement and shared decision-making between clinicians and patients remains challenging in routine healthcare practice due to factors such as low levels of health literacy among patients and their reluctance to actively participate, barriers rooted in clinicians' attitudes, scepticism towards patient knowledge and ineffective communication strategies, busy healthcare environments and limited resources.AI assistance for the three components of EBP AI presents a promising solution to address several challenges inherent in the research process, from conducting studies, generating evidence, synthesizing findings, and disseminating crucial information to clinicians to implementing these findings into routine practice. AI systems have a distinct advantage over human clinicians in processing specific types of data and information. The use of AI has shown great promise in areas such as image analysis. AI presents promising avenues to enhance patient engagement by saving time for clinicians and has the potential to increase patient autonomy although there is a lack of research on this issue.Conclusion This review underscores AI's potential to augment evidence-based healthcare practices, potentially marking the emergence of EBP 2.0. However, there are also uncertainties regarding how AI will contribute to a more evidence-based healthcare. Hence, empirical research is essential to validate and substantiate various aspects of AI use in healthcare.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] What counts as evidence in evidence-based practice?
    Rycroft-Malone, J
    Seers, K
    Titchen, A
    Harvey, G
    Kitson, A
    McCormack, B
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2004, 47 (01) : 81 - 90
  • [22] Extension of the CCMS 2.0 maturity model towards Artificial Intelligence
    Nick, Gabor
    Ko, Andrea
    Szaller, Adam
    Zeleny, Klaudia
    Kadar, Botond
    Kovacs, Tibor
    IFAC PAPERSONLINE, 2022, 55 (10): : 293 - 298
  • [23] Beliefs and expectations of paramedics towards evidence-based practice and research
    Simpson, Paul M.
    Bendall, Jason C.
    Patterson, Jillian
    Middleton, Paul M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED HEALTHCARE, 2012, 10 (03) : 197 - 203
  • [24] Navigating the evidence-based practice maze
    Hudson, Kathy
    Duke, Gloria
    Haas, Barbara
    Varnell, Gayle
    JOURNAL OF NURSING MANAGEMENT, 2008, 16 (04) : 409 - 416
  • [27] Evidence-based practice implementation in healthcare in China: a living scoping review
    Zhao, Junqiang
    Bai, Wenhui
    Zhang, Qian
    Su, Yujie
    Wang, Jinfang
    Du, Xiaoning
    Zhou, Yajing
    Kong, Chang
    Qing, Yanbing
    Gong, Shaohua
    Meng, Meiqi
    Wei, Changyun
    Li, Dina
    Wu, Jian
    Li, Xuejing
    Chen, Wenjun
    Hu, Jiale
    LANCET REGIONAL HEALTH-WESTERN PACIFIC, 2022, 20
  • [28] Assessing readiness for evidence-based practice among healthcare professionals in Egypt
    Ghaidaa A. Ahmed
    Maggie M. Abbassi
    Samar F. Farid
    Nirmeen A. Sabry
    BMC Medical Education, 25 (1)