Literature DB >> 33160514

Evaluating predictive models in reproductive medicine.

Carol Lynn Curchoe1, Adolfo Flores-Saiffe Farias2, Gerardo Mendizabal-Ruiz3, Alejandro Chavez-Badiola4.   

Abstract

Predictive modeling has become a distinct subdiscipline of reproductive medicine, and researchers and clinicians are just learning the skills and expertise to evaluate artificial intelligence (AI) studies. Diagnostic tests and model predictions are subject to evaluation. Their use offers potential for both harm and benefit in terms of diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. The performance of AI models and their potential clinical utility hinge on the quality and size of the databases used, the types and distribution of data, and the particular AI method applied. Additionally, when images are involved, the method of capturing, preprocessing, and treatment and accurate labeling of images becomes an important component of AI modeling. Inconsistent image treatment or inaccurate labeling of images can lead to an inconsistent database, resulting in poor AI accuracy. We discuss the critical appraisal of AI models in reproductive medicine and convey the importance of transparency and standardization in reporting AI models so that the risk of bias and the potential clinical utility of AI can be assessed.
Copyright © 2020 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Artificial intelligence; artificial neural networks; convolutional neural networks; deep learning; machine learning

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33160514     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.09.159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  6 in total

Review 1.  Automation in ART: Paving the Way for the Future of Infertility Treatment.

Authors:  Kadrina Abdul Latif Abdullah; Tomiris Atazhanova; Alejandro Chavez-Badiola; Sourima Biswas Shivhare
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 2.924

2.  Should there be an "AI" in TEAM? Embryologists selection of high implantation potential embryos improves with the aid of an artificial intelligence algorithm.

Authors:  V W Fitz; M K Kanakasabapathy; P Thirumalaraju; H Kandula; L B Ramirez; L Boehnlein; J E Swain; C L Curchoe; K James; I Dimitriadis; I Souter; C L Bormann; H Shafiee
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 3.357

3.  Interpretable, not black-box, artificial intelligence should be used for embryo selection.

Authors:  Michael Anis Mihdi Afnan; Yanhe Liu; Vincent Conitzer; Cynthia Rudin; Abhishek Mishra; Julian Savulescu; Masoud Afnan
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2021-11-02

4.  A Joint Model of Random Forest and Artificial Neural Network for the Diagnosis of Endometriosis.

Authors:  Jiajie She; Danna Su; Ruiying Diao; Liping Wang
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 4.599

5.  Robust and generalizable embryo selection based on artificial intelligence and time-lapse image sequences.

Authors:  Jørgen Berntsen; Jens Rimestad; Jacob Theilgaard Lassen; Dang Tran; Mikkel Fly Kragh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-02       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Embryo selection with artificial intelligence: how to evaluate and compare methods?

Authors:  Mikkel Fly Kragh; Henrik Karstoft
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-06-26       Impact factor: 3.412

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.