TY - JOUR
T1 - Artificial Intelligence and Predictive Modeling in Spinal Oncology
T2 - A Narrative Review
AU - Kuijten, Rene Harmen
AU - Zijlstra, Hester
AU - Groot, Olivier Quinten
AU - Schwab, Joseph Hasbrouck
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery.
PY - 2023/6/1
Y1 - 2023/6/1
N2 - Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) tremendously influences our daily lives and the medical field, changing the scope of medicine. One of the fields where AI, and, in particular, predictive modeling, holds great promise is spinal oncology. An accurate patient prognosis is essential to determine the optimal treatment strategy for patients with spinal metastases. Multiple studies demonstrated that the physician’s survival predictions are inaccurate, which resulted in the development of numerous predictive models. However, difficulties arise when trying to interpret these models and, more importantly, assess their quality. Objective: To provide an overview of all stages and challenges in developing predictive models using the Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine learning algorithms as an example. Methods: A narrative review of all relevant articles known to the authors was conducted. Results: Building a predictive model consists of 6 stages: preparation, development, internal validation, presentation, external validation, and implementation. During validation, the following measures are essential to assess the model’s performance: calibration, discrimination, decision curve analysis, and the Brier score. The structured methodology in developing, validating, and reporting the model is vital when building predictive models. Two principal guidelines are the transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis checklist and the prediction model risk of bias assessment. To date, many predictive modeling studies lack the right validation measures or improperly report their methodology. Conclusions: A new health care age is being ushered in by the rapid advancement of AI and its applications in spinal oncology. A myriad of predictive models are being developed; however, the subsequent stages, quality of validation, transparent reporting, and implementation still need improvement.
AB - Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) tremendously influences our daily lives and the medical field, changing the scope of medicine. One of the fields where AI, and, in particular, predictive modeling, holds great promise is spinal oncology. An accurate patient prognosis is essential to determine the optimal treatment strategy for patients with spinal metastases. Multiple studies demonstrated that the physician’s survival predictions are inaccurate, which resulted in the development of numerous predictive models. However, difficulties arise when trying to interpret these models and, more importantly, assess their quality. Objective: To provide an overview of all stages and challenges in developing predictive models using the Skeletal Oncology Research Group machine learning algorithms as an example. Methods: A narrative review of all relevant articles known to the authors was conducted. Results: Building a predictive model consists of 6 stages: preparation, development, internal validation, presentation, external validation, and implementation. During validation, the following measures are essential to assess the model’s performance: calibration, discrimination, decision curve analysis, and the Brier score. The structured methodology in developing, validating, and reporting the model is vital when building predictive models. Two principal guidelines are the transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for individual prognosis or diagnosis checklist and the prediction model risk of bias assessment. To date, many predictive modeling studies lack the right validation measures or improperly report their methodology. Conclusions: A new health care age is being ushered in by the rapid advancement of AI and its applications in spinal oncology. A myriad of predictive models are being developed; however, the subsequent stages, quality of validation, transparent reporting, and implementation still need improvement.
KW - artificial intelligence
KW - clinical decision support
KW - machine learning
KW - orthopedic surgery
KW - prediction tools
KW - spinal oncology
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85167983848
U2 - 10.14444/8500
DO - 10.14444/8500
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85167983848
SN - 2211-4599
VL - 17
SP - S45-S56
JO - International Journal of Spine Surgery
JF - International Journal of Spine Surgery
IS - S1
ER -