A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of community-based blinding fundus diseases screening with artificial intelligence: A modelling study from Shanghai, China. | LitMetric

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of community-based blinding fundus diseases screening with artificial intelligence: A modelling study from Shanghai, China.

Comput Biol Med

Shanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/ Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, No. 1440, Hongqiao Road, Shanghai, China; National Clinical Research Center for Eye Diseases, No. 1440, Hongqiao Road, Shanghai, China; Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Precise Diagnosis and Treatment of Eye Diseases, No. 1440, Hongqiao Road, Shanghai, China; Department of Ophthalmology, Shanghai General Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 85/86, Wujin Road, Shanghai, China.

Published: December 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study explores the effectiveness and cost of AI application in community screening for blinding fundus diseases, comparing different screening methods over 30 years for residents starting at age 60.
  • Three scenarios were assessed: traditional manual grading, AI-assisted screening, and AI-assisted screening with process reengineering.
  • The results indicate that while both AI-assisted methods improved outcomes, the process reengineered approach was more cost-effective, costing less while achieving the same health benefits.

Article Abstract

Background: With application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the disease screening, process reengineering occurred simultaneously. Whether process reengineering deserves special emphasis in AI implementation in the community-based blinding fundus diseases screening is not clear.

Method: Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed employing decision-analytic Markov models. A hypothetical cohort of community residents was followed in the model over a period of 30 1-year Markov cycles, starting from the age of 60. The simulated cohort was based on work data of the Shanghai Digital Eye Disease Screening program (SDEDS). Three scenarios were compared: centralized screening with manual grading-based telemedicine systems (Scenario 1), centralized screening with an AI-assisted screening system (Scenario 2), and process reengineered screening with an AI-assisted screening system (Scenario 3). The main outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR).

Results: Compared with Scenario 1, Scenario 2 results in incremental 187.03 years of blindness avoided and incremental 106.78 QALYs at an additional cost of $ 490010.62 per 10,000 people screened, with an ICER of $2619.98 per year of blindness avoided and an ICUR of $4589.13 per QALY. Compared with Scenario 1, Scenario 3 results in incremental 187.03 years of blindness avoided and incremental 106.78 QALYs at an additional cost of $242313.23 per 10,000 people screened, with an ICER of $1295.60 per year of blindness avoided and an ICUR of $2269.35 per QALY. Although Scenario 2 and 3 could be considered cost-effective, the screening cost of Scenario 3 was 27.6 % and the total cost was 1.1 % lower, with the same expected effectiveness and utility. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses show that Scenario 3 dominated 69.1 % and 70.3 % of simulations under one and three times the local GDP per capita thresholds.

Conclusions: AI can improve the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of screenings, especially when process reengineering is performed. Therefore, process reengineering is strongly recommended when AI is implemented.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2024.109329DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

process reengineering
16
blindness avoided
16
cost-effectiveness cost-utility
12
screening
10
scenario
10
community-based blinding
8
blinding fundus
8
fundus diseases
8
diseases screening
8
artificial intelligence
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!