Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2025
Hydra, a Computer-Based Platform for Aiding Clinicians in Cardiovascular Analysis and Diagnosis
Published on: September 26, 2018
Use of artificial intelligence in obstetric and gynaecological diagnostics: a protocol for a systematic review and
Anjalee Chaurasia1, Georgia Curry2, Yi Zhao2
1School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK anjalee.chaurasia18@gmail.com.
Introduction:
Emerging developments in applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare offer the opportunity to improve diagnostic capabilities in obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G), ensuring early detection of pathology, optimal management and improving survival. Consensus on a robust AI healthcare framework is crucial for standardising protocols that promote data privacy and transparency, minimise bias, and ensure patient safety. Here, we describe the study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate current applications of AI in O&G diagnostics with consideration of reporting standards used and their ethical implications. This protocol is written following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 checklist.
Methods And Analysis:
The study objective is to explore the current application of AI in O&G diagnostics and assess the reporting standards used in these studies. Electronic bibliographic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane will be searched. Study selection, data extraction and subsequent narrative synthesis and meta-analyses will be carried out following the PRISMA-P guidelines. Included papers will be English-language full-text articles from May 2015 to March 2024, which provide original data, as AI has been redefined in recent literature. Papers must use AI as the predictive method, focusing on improving O&G diagnostic outcomes.We will evaluate the reporting standards including the risk of bias, lack of transparency and consider the ethical implications and potential harm to patients. Outcome measures will involve assessing the included studies against gold-standard criteria for robustness of model development (Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis, model predictive performance, model risk of bias and applicability (Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool and study reporting (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-AI) guidance.
Ethics And Dissemination:
Ethical approval is not required for this systematic review. Findings will be shared through peer-reviewed publications. There will be no patient or public involvement in this study.
Prospero Registration Number:
CRD42022357024 .
