Dor Hadida Barzilai MD , Karin Sudri MA , Gal Goshen PhD , Eyal Klang MD , Eyal Zimlichman MD , Israel Barbash MD , Michal Cohen Shelly BSc, MBA
{"title":"Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating Artificial Intelligence in Cardiovascular Care","authors":"Dor Hadida Barzilai MD , Karin Sudri MA , Gal Goshen PhD , Eyal Klang MD , Eyal Zimlichman MD , Israel Barbash MD , Michal Cohen Shelly BSc, MBA","doi":"10.1016/j.jacadv.2025.102152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promise in transforming health care, particularly in cardiology. However, there is a lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating its impact on crucial clinical outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to synthesize existing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of AI in cardiology, evaluating its impact on key clinical outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 2024. We included RCTs evaluating machine learning models compared to traditional methods in cardiovascular care. Primary outcomes focused on patient-important metrics, while secondary outcomes covered time and resource savings.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted between 2021 and 2024, with 81.2% being multicenter trials. Five studies (45.5%) reported improvements in clinical events, 6 (54.5%) showed enhanced diagnostic accuracy and early detection, and 3 (27.3%) demonstrated improved resource utilization.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This review highlights AI's potential to enhance cardiovascular care through improved early detection, diagnostic accuracy, and resource efficiency. However, the limited number of RCTs indicates a need for more high-quality studies to validate AI’s effectiveness across various clinical domains.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73527,"journal":{"name":"JACC advances","volume":"4 11","pages":"Article 102152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JACC advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772963X25005770","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promise in transforming health care, particularly in cardiology. However, there is a lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating its impact on crucial clinical outcomes.
Objectives
The purpose of this study was to synthesize existing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the application of AI in cardiology, evaluating its impact on key clinical outcomes.
Methods
We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, searching MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 2024. We included RCTs evaluating machine learning models compared to traditional methods in cardiovascular care. Primary outcomes focused on patient-important metrics, while secondary outcomes covered time and resource savings.
Results
Eleven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted between 2021 and 2024, with 81.2% being multicenter trials. Five studies (45.5%) reported improvements in clinical events, 6 (54.5%) showed enhanced diagnostic accuracy and early detection, and 3 (27.3%) demonstrated improved resource utilization.
Conclusions
This review highlights AI's potential to enhance cardiovascular care through improved early detection, diagnostic accuracy, and resource efficiency. However, the limited number of RCTs indicates a need for more high-quality studies to validate AI’s effectiveness across various clinical domains.
背景:人工智能(AI)在改变医疗保健,特别是心脏病学方面显示出了希望。然而,缺乏高质量的证据证明其对关键临床结果的影响。目的:本研究的目的是综合人工智能在心脏病学应用的随机对照试验(RCTs)的现有证据,评估其对关键临床结局的影响。方法:我们按照PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for systematic Reviews and meta - analysis)指南,检索MEDLINE、Web of Science和Cochrane Library,从成立到2024年11月进行了系统评价。我们纳入了评估机器学习模型与传统心血管护理方法的随机对照试验。主要结果侧重于患者重要指标,而次要结果涵盖时间和资源节省。结果:11项rct符合纳入标准。研究在2021年至2024年间进行,其中81.2%为多中心试验。5项研究(45.5%)报告了临床事件的改善,6项研究(54.5%)显示了诊断准确性和早期发现的提高,3项研究(27.3%)显示了资源利用的改善。结论:本综述强调了人工智能通过提高早期检测、诊断准确性和资源效率来增强心血管护理的潜力。然而,有限数量的随机对照试验表明需要更多高质量的研究来验证人工智能在各个临床领域的有效性。