Exploring the feasibility of an artificial intelligence based clinical decision support system for cutaneous melanoma detection in primary care – a mixed method study

References

• Jones O, Ranmuthu CKI, Hall P, et al. Recognising skin cancer in primary care. Adv Ther. 2020;37(1):603–616. doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.9976475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424. doi: 10.3322/CAAC.21492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erdei E, Torres SM. A new understanding in the epidemiology of melanoma. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2010;10(11):1811–1823. doi: 10.1586/era.10.170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martens MC, Seebode C, Lehmann J, et al. Photocarcinogenesis and skin cancer prevention strategies: an update. Anticancer Res. 2018;38(2):1153–1158. doi: 10.21873/ANTICANRES.12334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guy GP, Ekwueme DU, Tangka FK, et al. Melanoma treatment costs: a systematic review of the literature, 1990–2011. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(5):537–545. doi: 10.1016/J.AMEPRE.2012.07.031.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vashist S, Schneider E, Luong J. Commercial smartphone-based devices and smart applications for personalized healthcare monitoring and management. Diagnostics (Basel). 2014;4(3):104–128. doi: 10.3390/DIAGNOSTICS4030104.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blease C, Kaptchuk TJ, Bernstein MH, et al. Artificial intelligence and the future of primary care: exploratory qualitative study of UK general practitioners’ views. J Med Internet Res. 2019;21(3):e12802. doi: 10.2196/12802.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang F, Preininger A. AI in health: state of the art, challenges, and future directions. Yearb Med Inform. 2019;28(1):16–26. doi: 10.1055/S-0039-1677908.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Menvielle L, Audrain-Pontevia AF, Menvielle W. The digitization of healthcare: new challenges and opportunities. Palgrave Macmillan London (Book Publisher), 1st Edition. 2017:1–454. doi: 10.1057/978-1-349-95173-4/COVER.
   Google Scholar
• Topol EJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44–56. doi: 10.1038/S41591-018-0300-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• apão, L.V. (2019). The Future of Healthcare: The Impact of Digitalization on Healthcare Services Performance. In: Pereira Neto, A., Flynn, M. (eds) The Internet and Health in Brazil. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-99289-1_22/COVER/.
   Google Scholar
• Frisinger A, Papachristou P. The voice of healthcare: introducing digital decision support systems into clinical practice - a qualitative study. BMC Prim Care. 2023;24(1):67. doi: 10.1186/S12875-023-02024-6/TABLES/1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shinners L, Aggar C, Grace S, et al. Exploring healthcare professionals’ understanding and experiences of artificial intelligence technology use in the delivery of healthcare: an integrative review. Health Informatics J. 2020;26(2):1225–1236. doi: 10.1177/1460458219874641.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson HA, Tribe RM, Shennan AH. The role of medical smartphone apps in clinical decision-support: a literature review. Artif Intell Med. 2019;100:101707. doi: 10.1016/J.ARTMED.2019.101707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adamidi ES, Mitsis K, Nikita KS. Artificial intelligence in clinical care amidst COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2021;19:2833–2850. doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.05.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasr-Esfahani E, Samavi S, Karimi N, et al. Melanoma detection by analysis of clinical images using convolutional neural network. 2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC). IEEE; 2016. p. 1373–1376. Available from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7590963/. doi: 10.1109/EMBC.2016.7590963.
   Google Scholar
• Baig R, Bibi M, Hamid A, et al. Deep learning approaches towards skin lesion segmentation and classification from dermoscopic images - A review. Curr Med Imaging. 2020;16(5):513–533. doi: 10.2174/1573405615666190129120449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dick V, Sinz C, Mittlböck M, et al. Accuracy of computer-aided diagnosis of melanoma: a meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155(11):1291–1299. doi: 10.1001/JAMADERMATOL.2019.1375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu K-H, Beam AL, Kohane IS. Artificial intelligence in healthcare. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018;2(10):719–731. doi: 10.1038/s41551-018-0305-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haenssle HA, Fink C, Schneiderbauer R, et al. Man against machine: diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network for dermoscopic melanoma recognition in comparison to 58 dermatologists. Ann Oncol. 2018;29(8):1836–1842. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fink C, Blum A, Buhl T, et al. Diagnostic performance of a deep learning convolutional neural network in the differentiation of combined naevi and melanomas. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;34(6):1355–1361. doi: 10.1111/jdv.16165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polesie S, Gillstedt M, Kittler H, et al. Assessment of melanoma thickness based on dermoscopy images: an open, web-based, international, diagnostic study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2022;36(11):2002–2007. doi: 10.1111/JDV.18436.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillstedt M, Mannius L, Paoli J, et al. Evaluation of melanoma thickness with clinical close-up and dermoscopic images using a convolutional neural network. Acta Derm Venereol. 2022;102:adv00790. doi: 10.2340/ACTADV.V102.2681.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler JK, Sies K, Fink C, et al. Melanoma recognition by a deep learning convolutional neural network—performance in different melanoma subtypes and localisations. Eur J Cancer. 2020;127:21–29. doi: 10.1016/J.EJCA.2019.11.020.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
   Google Scholar
• Proudfoot K. Inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis in mixed methods research. J Mix Methods Res. 2022;2023:308–326. doi: 10.1177/15586898221126816/FORMAT/EPUB.
   Google Scholar
• Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods. 2006;5(1):80–92. doi: 10.1177/160940690600500107.
   Google Scholar
• The ISIC. Challenge Dataset | ISIC 2020 challenge dataset [Internet]; 2020. [cited 2021 May 19]. Available from: https://challenge2020.isic-archive.com/.
   Google Scholar
• Wiklund PE, Me Kendler J, Strochlic AY, et al. Usability testing of medical devices. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2010. doi: 10.1201/b19082.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson S, Mishuris R, O’Connell A, et al. “Think aloud” and “near live” usability testing of two complex clinical decision support tools. Int J Med Inform. 2017;106:1–8. doi: 10.1016/J.IJMEDINF.2017.06.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li AC, Kannry JL, Kushniruk A, et al. Integrating usability testing and think-aloud protocol analysis with “near-live” clinical simulations in evaluating clinical decision support. Int J Med Inform. 2012;81(11):761–772. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.02.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, et al. Thematic analysis. Int J Qual Methods. 2017;16(1):160940691773384. doi: 10.1177/1609406917733847.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morse JM. Confusing categories and themes. Qual Health Res. 2008;18(6):727–728. doi: 10.1177/1049732308314930.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen KA, Patel H, Haggstrom DA, et al. Utilizing a user-centered approach to develop and assess pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for thiopurine methyltransferase. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2019;19(1):194. doi: 10.1186/S12911-019-0919-4/TABLES/4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peres SC, Pham T, Phillips R. Validation of the system usability scale (SUS): SUS in the wild. 2013;192–196. doi: 10.1177/1541931213571043.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis JR, Sauro J. The factor structure of the system usability scale. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). 2009;5619 LNCS:94–103. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9_12/COVER/.
   Google Scholar
• World Medical Association. Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191–2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Education. Swedish Ethical Review Act (2003:460) [Internet]; 2023. [cited 2022 Apr 10]. Available from: https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/lag-2003460-om-etikprovning-av-forskning-som_sfs-2003-460.
   Google Scholar
• Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–357. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangor A, Kortum P, Miller J. Determining what individual SUS scores mean: adding an adjective rating scale. J Usability Stud. 2009;4:114–123.
   Google Scholar
• Kamradt M, Poß-Doering R, Szecsenyi J. Exploring physician perspectives on using real-world care data for the development of artificial intelligence–based technologies in health care: qualitative study. JMIR Form Res. 2022;6(5):e35367. https://formative.jmir.org/2022/5/e35367. 2022;6:e35367. doi: 10.2196/35367.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Petkus H, Hoogewerf J, Wyatt JC. What do senior physicians think about AI and clinical decision support systems: quantitative and qualitative analysis of data from specialty societies. Clin Med (Lond). 2020;20(3):324–328. doi: 10.7861/CLINMED.2019-0317.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim K, Neal-Smith G, Mitchell C, et al. Perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of skin cancer: an outpatient survey. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2022;47(3):542–546. doi: 10.1111/CED.14969.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson CA, Pérez-Chada LM, Creadore A, et al. Patient perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence for skin cancer screening: a qualitative study. JAMA Dermatol. 2020;156(5):501–512. doi: 10.1001/JAMADERMATOL.2019.5014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buck C, Doctor E, Hennrich J, et al. General practitioners’ attitudes toward artificial intelligence-enabled systems: interview study. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24(1):e28916. doi: 10.2196/28916.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keskinbora KH. Medical ethics considerations on artificial intelligence. J Clin Neurosci. 2019;64:277–282. doi: 10.1016/J.JOCN.2019.03.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar