Click here to read some interesting recently published papers from our community. If you have published an article in the field of in silico medicine, send it to us: we will include it in this section of the newsletter!
Briefing in Bioinformatics: Consensus statement on the credibility assessment of machine learning predictor
Alessandra Aldieri et al
Abstract
The rapid integration of machine learning (ML) predictors into in silico medicine has revolutionized the estimation of quantities of interest that are otherwise challenging to measure directly. However, the credibility of these predictors is critical, especially when they inform high-stakes healthcare decisions. This position paper presents a consensus statement developed by experts within the In Silico World Community of Practice. We outline 12 key statements forming the theoretical foundation for evaluating the credibility of ML predictors, emphasizing the necessity of causal knowledge, rigorous error quantification, and robustness to biases. By comparing ML predictors with biophysical models, we highlight unique challenges associated with implicit causal knowledge and propose strategies to ensure reliability and applicability. Our recommendations aim to guide researchers, developers, and regulators in the rigorous assessment and deployment of ML predictors in clinical and biomedical contexts.
---------------------------------------
European Heart Journal: Artificial intelligence to improve cardiovascular population health
Benjamin Meder et al
Abstract
With the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), novel opportunities arise to revolutionize healthcare delivery and improve population health. This review provides a state-of-the-art overview of recent advancements in AI technologies and their applications in enhancing cardiovascular health at the population level. From predictive analytics to personalized interventions, AI-driven approaches are increasingly being utilized to analyse vast amounts of healthcare data, uncover disease patterns, and optimize resource allocation. Furthermore, AI-enabled technologies such as wearable devices and remote monitoring systems facilitate continuous cardiac monitoring, early detection of diseases, and promise more timely interventions. Additionally, AI-powered systems aid healthcare professionals in clinical decision-making processes, thereby improving accuracy and treatment effectiveness. By using AI systems to augment existing data sources, such as registries and biobanks, completely new research questions can be addressed to identify novel mechanisms and pharmaceutical targets. Despite this remarkable potential of AI in enhancing population health, challenges related to legal issues, data privacy, algorithm bias, and ethical considerations must be addressed to ensure equitable access and improved outcomes for all individuals.
---------------------------------------
IEEE: Position paper - Extending Credibility Assessment of In Silico Medicine Predictors to Machine Learning Predictors
Marco Viceconti et al
Abstract
There are several situations where it would be convenient if a quantity of interest essential to support a medical or regulatory decision could be predicted as a function of other measurable quantities rather than measured experimentally. To do so, we need to ensure that in all practical cases, the predicted value does not differ from what we would measure experimentally by more than an acceptable threshold, defined by the context in which that quantity of interest is used in the decision-making process. This is called Credibility Assessment. Initial work, which guided the elaboration of the first technical standard on the topic (ASME VV-40:2018), focused on predictive models built from available mechanistic knowledge of the phenomenon of interest. For this class of predictive models, sometimes called biophysical models, a credibility assessment practice based on the so-called verification, Validation, Uncertainty, Quantification and Applicability (VVUQA) analysis is accepted. Through theoretical considerations, this position paper aims to summarise a complex debate on whether such an approach can be extended to predictive models built without any mechanistic knowledge (machine learning (ML) predictors). We conclude that the VVUQA can be extended to ML-based predictors; however, since there is no certainty that the features used to predict the quantity of interest are necessary and sufficient, according to the VVUQA framework, such credibility assessment is limited to the test sets used for the validation studies. This calls for a Total Product Life Cycle approach, where periodic retesting of ML-based predictors is part of post-marketing surveillance to ensure that no "unknown bias" may play a role.
---------------------------------------
