Despite high prevalence of CHB in China, our study shows knowledge is limited and there is significant societal and internalized stigma associated with HBV infection.

The complexity of transplant medicine pushes the boundaries of innate, human reasoning. From networks of immune modulators to dynamic pharmacokinetics to variable postoperative graft survival to equitable allocation of scarce organs, machine learning promises to inform clinical decision making by deciphering prodigious amounts of available data. This paper reviews current research describing how algorithms have the potential to augment clinical practice in solid organ transplantation. We provide a general introduction to different machine learning techniques, describing their strengths, limitations, and barriers to clinical implementation. We summarize emerging evidence that recent advances that allow machine learning algorithms to predict acute post-surgical and long-term outcomes, classify biopsy and radiographic data, augment pharmacologic decision making, and accurately represent the complexity of host immune response. Yet, many of these applications exist in pre-clinical form only, supported primarily by evidence of single-center, retrospective studies. Prospective investigation of these technologies has the potential to unlock the potential of machine learning to augment solid organ transplantation clinical care and health care delivery systems.

Human pathophysiology is occasionally too complex for unaided hypothetical-deductive reasoning and the isolated application of additive or linear statistical methods. Clustering algorithms use input data patterns and distributions to form groups of similar patients or diseases that share distinct properties. Although clinicians frequently perform tasks that may be enhanced by clustering, few receive formal training and clinician-centered literature in clustering is sparse. To add value to clinical care and research, optimal clustering practices require a thorough understanding of how to process and optimize data, select features, weigh strengths and weaknesses of different clustering methods, select the optimal clustering method, and apply clustering methods to solve problems. These concepts and our suggestions for implementing them are described in this narrative review of published literature. All clustering methods share the weakness of finding potential clusters even when natural clusters do not exist, underscoring the importance of applying data-driven techniques as well as clinical and statistical expertise to clustering analyses. When applied properly, patient and disease phenotype clustering can reveal obscured associations that can help clinicians understand disease pathophysiology, predict treatment response, and identify patients for clinical trial enrollment.

No abstract

Mistrust is a major barrier to implementing deep learning in healthcare settings. Entrustment could be earned by conveying model certainty, or the probability that a given model output is accurate, but the use of uncertainty estimation for deep learning entrustment is largely unexplored, and there is no consensus regarding optimal methods for quantifying uncertainty. Our purpose is to critically evaluate methods for quantifying uncertainty in deep learning for healthcare applications and propose a conceptual framework for specifying certainty of deep learning predictions. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases for articles relevant to study objectives, complying with PRISMA guidelines, rated study quality using validated tools, and extracted data according to modified CHARMS criteria. Among 30 included studies, 24 described medical imaging applications. All imaging model architectures used convolutional neural networks or a variation thereof. The predominant method for quantifying uncertainty was Monte Carlo dropout, producing predictions from multiple networks for which different neurons have dropped out and measuring variance across the distribution of resulting predictions. Conformal prediction offered similar strong performance in estimating uncertainty, along with ease of interpretation and application not only to deep learning but also to other machine learning approaches. Among the six articles describing non-imaging applications, model architectures and uncertainty estimation methods were heterogeneous, but predictive performance was generally strong, and uncertainty estimation was effective in comparing modeling methods. Overall, the use of model learning curves to quantify epistemic uncertainty (attributable to model parameters) was sparse. Heterogeneity in reporting methods precluded the performance of a meta-analysis. Uncertainty estimation methods have the potential to identify rare but important misclassifications made by deep learning models and compare modeling methods, which could build patient and clinician trust in deep learning applications in healthcare. Efficient maturation of this field will require standardized guidelines for reporting performance and uncertainty metrics.