Assuring the safety of AI-based clinical decision support systems: a case study of the AI Clinician for sepsis treatment
File(s)3 - Accepted paper.zip (3.55 MB)
Accepted version
Author(s)
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Study objectives: Establishing confidence in the safety of AI-based clinical decision support systems is important prior to clinical deployment and regulatory approval for systems with increasing autonomy. Here, we undertook safety assurance of the AI Clinician, a previously published reinforcement learning-based treatment recommendation system for sepsis.
Methods: As part of the safety assurance, we defined four clinical hazards in sepsis resuscitation based on clinical expert opinion and the existing literature. We then identified a set of unsafe scenarios and created safety constraints, intended to limit the action space of the AI agent with the goal of reducing the likelihood of hazardous decisions.
Results: Using a subset of the MIMIC-III database, we demonstrated that our previously published “AI Clinician” recommended fewer hazardous decisions than human clinicians in three out of our four pre-defined clinical scenarios, while the difference was not statistically significant in the fourth scenario. Then, we modified the reward function to satisfy our safety constraints and trained a new AI Clinician agent. The retrained model shows enhanced safety, without negatively impacting model performance.
Discussion: While some contextual patient information absent from the data may have pushed human clinicians to take hazardous actions, the data was curated to limit the impact of this confounder.
Conclusion: These advances provide a use case for the systematic safety assurance of AI-based clinical systems, towards the generation of explicit safety evidence, which could be replicated for other AI applications or other clinical contexts, and inform medical device regulatory bodies.
Methods: As part of the safety assurance, we defined four clinical hazards in sepsis resuscitation based on clinical expert opinion and the existing literature. We then identified a set of unsafe scenarios and created safety constraints, intended to limit the action space of the AI agent with the goal of reducing the likelihood of hazardous decisions.
Results: Using a subset of the MIMIC-III database, we demonstrated that our previously published “AI Clinician” recommended fewer hazardous decisions than human clinicians in three out of our four pre-defined clinical scenarios, while the difference was not statistically significant in the fourth scenario. Then, we modified the reward function to satisfy our safety constraints and trained a new AI Clinician agent. The retrained model shows enhanced safety, without negatively impacting model performance.
Discussion: While some contextual patient information absent from the data may have pushed human clinicians to take hazardous actions, the data was curated to limit the impact of this confounder.
Conclusion: These advances provide a use case for the systematic safety assurance of AI-based clinical systems, towards the generation of explicit safety evidence, which could be replicated for other AI applications or other clinical contexts, and inform medical device regulatory bodies.
Date Acceptance
2022-06-04
Citation
BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 29 (1)
ISSN
2632-1009
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Journal / Book Title
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
Volume
29
Issue
1
Copyright Statement
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
License URL
Sponsor
UKRI
National Institute for Health Research
UK Research and Innovation
NIHR
Lloyd's Register Foundation
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust: Research Capability Funding (RCF)
Identifier
https://informatics.bmj.com/content/29/1/e100549
Grant Number
AI_AWARD01869
EP/V025449/1
80012205
RDF04
Subjects
Artificial Intelligence
Sepsis
safety assessment
Autonomy
Reinforcement learning
Publication Status
Published