Artificial Intelligence in Pharmacoepidemiology: A Systematic Review. Part 2–Comparison of the Performance of Artificial Intelligence and Traditional Pharmacoepidemiological Techniques

Abstract

Aim: To summarize the evidence on the performance of artificial intelligence vs. traditional pharmacoepidemiological techniques.Methods: Ovid MEDLINE (01/1950 to 05/2019) was searched to identify observational studies, meta-analyses, and clinical trials using artificial intelligence techniques having a drug as the exposure or the outcome of the study. Only studies with an available full text in the English language were evaluated.Results: In all, 72 original articles and five reviews were identified via Ovid MEDLINE of which 19 (26.4%) compared the performance of artificial intelligence techniques with traditional pharmacoepidemiological methods. In total, 44 comparisons have been performed in articles that aimed at 1) predicting the needed dosage given the patient’s characteristics (31.8%), 2) predicting the clinical response following a pharmacological treatment (29.5%), 3) predicting the occurrence/severity of adverse drug reactions (20.5%), 4) predicting the propensity score (9.1%), 5) identifying subpopulation more at risk of drug inefficacy (4.5%), 6) predicting drug consumption (2.3%), and 7) predicting drug-induced lengths of stay in hospital (2.3%). In 22 out of 44 (50.0%) comparisons, artificial intelligence performed better than traditional pharmacoepidemiological techniques. Random forest (seven out of 11 comparisons; 63.6%) and artificial neural network (six out of 10 comparisons; 60.0%) were the techniques that in most of the comparisons outperformed traditional pharmacoepidemiological methods.Conclusion: Only a small fraction of articles compared the performance of artificial intelligence techniques with traditional pharmacoepidemiological methods and not all artificial intelligence techniques have been compared in a Pharmacoepidemiological setting. However, in 50% of comparisons, artificial intelligence performed better than pharmacoepidemiological techniques.

The PHARMACOM‐EPI Framework for Integrating Pharmacometric Modelling Into Pharmacoepidemiological Research Using Real‐World Data: Application to Assess Death Associated With Valproate

“…Sessa et al has proposed the use of artificial intelligence for performing data-driven retrieval of predictors and their nonlinear relationship for the outcome using real-world data. 1,[92][93][94][95][96] Such an approach can potentially lead to the identification of risk factors that can further undergo to pharmacological substantiation using available scientific evidence, clinical reasoning, and, in special circumstances, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations. In fact, it is not unusual to have pharmacometric models lacking risk factors for altered pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics.…”

Therapeutic efficacy of Xingnaojing injection for ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

“…According to the existing cases, arti cial intelligence (AI) has been applied to meta-analysis, which is used to balance a quick time to production with reasonable data quality assurances [68]. In addition to quickly acquiring and processing data, AI is also applied to recognition and prediction [69,70]. The bias risk of each link in the clinical trial design process will signi cantly affect the trial bias risk of meta-analysis.…”

Artificial intelligence-driven prediction of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death: a systematic review

“…Ovid MEDLINE (from 01/01/2019 to 2022/08/22) was searched, along with the reference lists in the reviews identified with our research query ( Supplementary Table 1 ). Search terms included in the query have been previously used in the context of systematic reviews of AI/ML models and were described by Sessa et al elsewhere ( 15 , 16 ). This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines ( 17 ).…”