在医疗保健中实现机器学习应用的成熟度框架:范围审查

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Yutong Li, Julie Tian, Ariana Xu, Russell Greiner, Jake Hayward, Andrew James Greenshaw, Bo Cao
{"title":"在医疗保健中实现机器学习应用的成熟度框架:范围审查","authors":"Yutong Li, Julie Tian, Ariana Xu, Russell Greiner, Jake Hayward, Andrew James Greenshaw, Bo Cao","doi":"10.2196/66559","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The exponential growth of publications regarding the application of machine learning (ML) tools in medicine highlights the significant potential for ML to revolutionize the field. Despite the multitude of literature surrounding this topic, there are limited publications addressing the implementation and feasibility of ML models in clinical practice. Currently, Machine Learning Operations (MLOps), a set of practices designed to deploy and maintain ML models in production, is used in various information technology and industrial settings. However, the MLOps pipeline is not well researched in medical settings, where multiple barriers exist to implementing ML pipelines into practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to detail how MLOps is implemented in health care and propose a maturity framework for the health care implementations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review search was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Results were synthesized using the 3-stage basic qualitative content analysis. We searched 4 databases (eg, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) to include any studies that involved proof of concept or real-world implementation of MLOps in health care. Studies not reported in English were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 19 studies were included in this scoping review. The MLOps workflow identified within the studies included (1) data extraction (19/19 studies), (2) data preparation and engineering (18/19 studies), (3) model training (19/19 studies), (4) measured ML metrics and model evaluation (17/19 studies), (5) model validation and test in production (14/19 studies), (6) model serving and deployment (15/19 studies), (7) continuous monitoring (14/19 studies), and (8) continual learning (13/19 studies). We proposed a 3-stage MLOps maturity framework for health care based on existing studies in the field, that is, low (5/19 studies), partial (1/19 studies), and full maturity (13/19 studies). There were 8/19 studies that discussed ethical, legislative, and stakeholder considerations for MLOps implementations in health care settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We investigated the implementation of MLOps in health care with a corresponding maturity framework. It is evident that only a limited number of studies reported the implementation of ML in health care contexts. Hence, it is imperative that we shift our focus toward creating an environment that supports the development of ML health care applications, such as improving existing data infrastructure, and engaging partners to support the development of MLOps applications. Specifically, we can include patients, policymakers, and health care professionals in the creation and implementation of ML applications. One of the main limitations includes the varying quality of each extracted study in terms of how the MLOps implementation was presented. Hence, it was difficult to verify the presence and discuss in depth all steps of the MLOps workflow for each study. Furthermore, due to the inherent nature of a scoping review protocol, there may be a compromise on an in-depth discussion of each step within the MLOps workflow.</p>","PeriodicalId":16337,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","volume":"27 ","pages":"e66559"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12448258/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Maturity Framework for Operationalizing Machine Learning Applications in Health Care: Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Yutong Li, Julie Tian, Ariana Xu, Russell Greiner, Jake Hayward, Andrew James Greenshaw, Bo Cao\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/66559\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The exponential growth of publications regarding the application of machine learning (ML) tools in medicine highlights the significant potential for ML to revolutionize the field. Despite the multitude of literature surrounding this topic, there are limited publications addressing the implementation and feasibility of ML models in clinical practice. Currently, Machine Learning Operations (MLOps), a set of practices designed to deploy and maintain ML models in production, is used in various information technology and industrial settings. However, the MLOps pipeline is not well researched in medical settings, where multiple barriers exist to implementing ML pipelines into practice.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to detail how MLOps is implemented in health care and propose a maturity framework for the health care implementations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review search was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Results were synthesized using the 3-stage basic qualitative content analysis. We searched 4 databases (eg, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) to include any studies that involved proof of concept or real-world implementation of MLOps in health care. Studies not reported in English were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 19 studies were included in this scoping review. The MLOps workflow identified within the studies included (1) data extraction (19/19 studies), (2) data preparation and engineering (18/19 studies), (3) model training (19/19 studies), (4) measured ML metrics and model evaluation (17/19 studies), (5) model validation and test in production (14/19 studies), (6) model serving and deployment (15/19 studies), (7) continuous monitoring (14/19 studies), and (8) continual learning (13/19 studies). We proposed a 3-stage MLOps maturity framework for health care based on existing studies in the field, that is, low (5/19 studies), partial (1/19 studies), and full maturity (13/19 studies). There were 8/19 studies that discussed ethical, legislative, and stakeholder considerations for MLOps implementations in health care settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We investigated the implementation of MLOps in health care with a corresponding maturity framework. It is evident that only a limited number of studies reported the implementation of ML in health care contexts. Hence, it is imperative that we shift our focus toward creating an environment that supports the development of ML health care applications, such as improving existing data infrastructure, and engaging partners to support the development of MLOps applications. Specifically, we can include patients, policymakers, and health care professionals in the creation and implementation of ML applications. One of the main limitations includes the varying quality of each extracted study in terms of how the MLOps implementation was presented. Hence, it was difficult to verify the presence and discuss in depth all steps of the MLOps workflow for each study. Furthermore, due to the inherent nature of a scoping review protocol, there may be a compromise on an in-depth discussion of each step within the MLOps workflow.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Internet Research\",\"volume\":\"27 \",\"pages\":\"e66559\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12448258/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Internet Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/66559\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/66559","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:关于机器学习(ML)工具在医学中的应用的出版物呈指数级增长,突显了ML彻底改变该领域的巨大潜力。尽管围绕这一主题有大量的文献,但在临床实践中解决ML模型的实现和可行性的出版物有限。目前,机器学习操作(MLOps)是一组旨在在生产中部署和维护ML模型的实践,用于各种信息技术和工业环境。然而,MLOps管道在医疗环境中没有得到很好的研究,在医疗环境中,实现ML管道存在多种障碍。目的:本研究旨在详细介绍MLOps在卫生保健中的实施情况,并提出卫生保健实施的成熟度框架。方法:根据乔安娜布里格斯研究所证据合成手册进行范围综述检索。采用3阶段基本定性含量分析综合结果。我们检索了4个数据库(例如MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science和Scopus),以纳入任何涉及医疗保健中MLOps的概念证明或实际实施的研究。未用英语报道的研究被排除在外。结果:本综述共纳入19项研究。研究中确定的MLOps工作流包括(1)数据提取(19/19项研究),(2)数据准备和工程(18/19项研究),(3)模型训练(19/19项研究),(4)测量的ML度量和模型评估(17/19项研究),(5)模型验证和生产测试(14/19项研究),(6)模型服务和部署(15/19项研究),(7)连续监测(14/19项研究),(8)持续学习(13/19项研究)。基于该领域现有的研究,我们提出了一个3阶段的MLOps成熟度框架,即低成熟度(5/19研究)、部分成熟度(1/19研究)和完全成熟度(13/19研究)。有8/19项研究讨论了在卫生保健环境中实施MLOps的伦理、立法和利益相关者考虑因素。结论:我们用相应的成熟度框架调查了MLOps在医疗保健中的实施情况。很明显,只有有限数量的研究报告了ML在卫生保健环境中的实施。因此,我们必须将重点转向创建一个支持ML医疗保健应用程序开发的环境,例如改进现有的数据基础设施,并与合作伙伴一起支持MLOps应用程序的开发。具体来说,我们可以将患者、政策制定者和医疗保健专业人员包括在ML应用程序的创建和实现中。主要的限制之一是,就MLOps实现的呈现方式而言,每个提取的研究的质量各不相同。因此,很难验证每个研究的MLOps工作流程的所有步骤的存在和深入讨论。此外,由于范围审查协议的固有性质,可能会对MLOps工作流中的每个步骤进行深入讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Maturity Framework for Operationalizing Machine Learning Applications in Health Care: Scoping Review.

Maturity Framework for Operationalizing Machine Learning Applications in Health Care: Scoping Review.

Maturity Framework for Operationalizing Machine Learning Applications in Health Care: Scoping Review.

Background: The exponential growth of publications regarding the application of machine learning (ML) tools in medicine highlights the significant potential for ML to revolutionize the field. Despite the multitude of literature surrounding this topic, there are limited publications addressing the implementation and feasibility of ML models in clinical practice. Currently, Machine Learning Operations (MLOps), a set of practices designed to deploy and maintain ML models in production, is used in various information technology and industrial settings. However, the MLOps pipeline is not well researched in medical settings, where multiple barriers exist to implementing ML pipelines into practice.

Objective: This study aims to detail how MLOps is implemented in health care and propose a maturity framework for the health care implementations.

Methods: A scoping review search was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Results were synthesized using the 3-stage basic qualitative content analysis. We searched 4 databases (eg, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) to include any studies that involved proof of concept or real-world implementation of MLOps in health care. Studies not reported in English were excluded.

Results: A total of 19 studies were included in this scoping review. The MLOps workflow identified within the studies included (1) data extraction (19/19 studies), (2) data preparation and engineering (18/19 studies), (3) model training (19/19 studies), (4) measured ML metrics and model evaluation (17/19 studies), (5) model validation and test in production (14/19 studies), (6) model serving and deployment (15/19 studies), (7) continuous monitoring (14/19 studies), and (8) continual learning (13/19 studies). We proposed a 3-stage MLOps maturity framework for health care based on existing studies in the field, that is, low (5/19 studies), partial (1/19 studies), and full maturity (13/19 studies). There were 8/19 studies that discussed ethical, legislative, and stakeholder considerations for MLOps implementations in health care settings.

Conclusions: We investigated the implementation of MLOps in health care with a corresponding maturity framework. It is evident that only a limited number of studies reported the implementation of ML in health care contexts. Hence, it is imperative that we shift our focus toward creating an environment that supports the development of ML health care applications, such as improving existing data infrastructure, and engaging partners to support the development of MLOps applications. Specifically, we can include patients, policymakers, and health care professionals in the creation and implementation of ML applications. One of the main limitations includes the varying quality of each extracted study in terms of how the MLOps implementation was presented. Hence, it was difficult to verify the presence and discuss in depth all steps of the MLOps workflow for each study. Furthermore, due to the inherent nature of a scoping review protocol, there may be a compromise on an in-depth discussion of each step within the MLOps workflow.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
5.40%
发文量
654
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) is a highly respected publication in the field of health informatics and health services. With a founding date in 1999, JMIR has been a pioneer in the field for over two decades. As a leader in the industry, the journal focuses on digital health, data science, health informatics, and emerging technologies for health, medicine, and biomedical research. It is recognized as a top publication in these disciplines, ranking in the first quartile (Q1) by Impact Factor. Notably, JMIR holds the prestigious position of being ranked #1 on Google Scholar within the "Medical Informatics" discipline.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信