Healthc Inform Res.  2022 Apr;28(2):143-151. 10.4258/hir.2022.28.2.143.

Stakeholders’ Requirements for Artificial Intelligence for Healthcare in Korea

• Yu JY
• Hong S
• Lee YC
• Lee KH
• Lee I
• Seo Y
• Kang M
• Kim K
• Cha WC
• Shin SY

• KMID: 2529796
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2022.28.2.143

Abstract

Objectives
The outlook of artificial intelligence for healthcare (AI4H) is promising. However, no studies have yet discussed the issues from the perspective of stakeholders in Korea. This research aimed to identify stakeholders’ requirements for AI4H to accelerate the business and research of AI4H.
Methods
We identified research funding trends from the Korean National Science and Technology Knowledge Information Service (NTIS) from 2015 and 2019 using “healthcare AI” and related keywords. Furthermore, we conducted an online survey with members of the Korean Society of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine to identify experts’ opinions regarding the development of AI4H. Finally, expert interviews were conducted with 13 experts in three areas (hospitals, industry, and academia).
Results
We found 160 related projects from the NTIS. The major data type was radiology images (59.4%). Dermatology-related diseases received the most funding, followed by pulmonary diseases. Based on the survey responses, radiology images (23.9%) were the most demanding data type. Over half of the solutions were related to diagnosis (33.3%) or prognosis prediction (31%). In the expert interviews, all experts mentioned healthcare data for AI solutions as a major issue. Experts in the industrial field mainly mentioned regulations, practical efficacy evaluation, and data accessibility.
Conclusions
We identified technology, regulatory, and data issues for practical AI4H applications from the perspectives of stakeholders in hospitals, industry, and academia in Korea. We found issues and requirements, including regulations, data utilization, reimbursement, and human resource development, that should be addressed to promote further research in AI4H.

Keyword

Artificial Intelligence; Stakeholder Participation; Interview; Surveys and Questionnaires

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Average funding by target disease per year.

• 

  Figure 2 Comparison of data types between NTIS (from 2015 to 2019) and the KOSAIM members’ survey in 2020.

Reference

References

1. BIS Research. Global artificial intelligence market in healthcare sector: analysis & forecasts, 2017–2025 [Internet]. Fremont (CA): BIS Research;2017. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://bisresearch.com/industry-report/global-artificial-intelligence-market-2025.html .

2. Markets and Markets. Artificial Intelligence in healthcare market by offering (hardware, software, services), technology (machine learning, NLP, context-aware computing, computer vision), application, end user and geography - global forecast to 2027 [Internet]. Northbrook (IL): Markets and Markets;2020. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/artificial-intelligence-healthcare-market-54679303.html .

3. Research and Markets. Global clinical decision support system market is forecast to reach EUR 277,79 billion by 2025 growing at a CAGR of 11% [Internet]. New York (NY): Markets Insider;2020. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/global-clinical-decision-support-system-market-is-forecast-to-reach-usd-317-billion-by-2025-growing-at-a-cagr-of-11-1029817665 .

4. Mahler M. Precision medicine and artificial intelligence: the perfect fit for autoimmunity. Cambridge (MA): Academic Press;2021.

5. The Medical Futurist. FDA-approved A.I.-based algorithms [Internet]. Budapest, Hungary: The Medical Futurist;2021. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://medicalfuturist.com/fda-approved-ai-basedalgorithms/ .

6. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. Development of medical device international standard guideline for artificial intelligence [Internet]. Cheongju, Korea: Ministry of Food and Drug Safety;2020. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.mfds.go.kr/brd/m_99/view.do?seq=44588&srchFr=&srchTo=&srchWord=&srchTp=&itm_seq_1=0&itm_seq_2=0&multi_itm_seq=0&company_cd=&company_nm=&page=1 .

7. Wu E, Wu K, Daneshjou R, Ouyang D, Ho DE, Zou J. How medical AI devices are evaluated: limitations and recommendations from an analysis of FDA approvals. Nat Med. 2021; 27(4):582–4.

8. Shen J, Zhang CJ, Jiang B, Chen J, Song J, Liu Z, et al. Artificial intelligence versus clinicians in disease diagnosis: systematic review. JMIR Med Inform. 2019; 7(3):e10010.

9. Liu X, Faes L, Kale AU, Wagner SK, Fu DJ, Bruynseels A, et al. A comparison of deep learning performance against health-care professionals in detecting diseases from medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Digit Health. 2019; 1(6):e271–e297.

10. Perrault R, Shoham Y, Brynjolfsson E, Clark J, Etchemendy J, Grosz B, et al. The artificial intelligence index 2019 annual report [Internet]. Stanford (CA): Stanford University;2019. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://hai.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/ai_index_2019_report.pdf .

11. Matheny M, Israni ST, Auerbach A, Beam A, Bleicher P, Chapman W, et al. Artificial intelligence in health care: the hope, the hype, the promise, the peril [Internet]. Washington (DC): National Academy of Medicine;2019. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://nam.edu/artificial-intelligence-special-publication/ .

12. Big Data Value Association. AI in healthcare whitepaper [Internet]. Brussel, Belgium: Big Data Value Association;2020. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.bdva.eu/sites/default/files/AI%20in%20Healthcare%20Whitepaper_November%202020_0.pdf .

13. Park CW, Seo SW, Kang N, Ko B, Choi BW, Park CM, et al. Artificial Intelligence in health care: current applications and issues. J Korean Med Sci. 2020; 35(42):e379.

14. Lee D, Yoon SN. Application of artificial intelligence-based technologies in the healthcare industry: opportunities and challenges. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18(1):271.

15. Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A. Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res. 2012; 22(10):1435–43.

16. National Science & Technology Information Service [Internet]. Daejeon, Korea: National Science & Technology Information Service;2022. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.ntis.go.kr/en/GpIndex.do .

17. Konecny J, McMahan HB, Yu FX, Richtarik P, Suresh AT, Bacon D. Federated learning: strategies for improving communication efficiency [Internet]. Ithaca (NY): arXiv.org;2017. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.05492 .

18. Gentry C. Fully homomorphic encryption using ideal lattices. In : Proceedings of the 41st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC); ; 2009 May 31–Jun 2; Bethesda, MA. p. 169–78.

19. Bellovin SM, Dutta PK, Reitinger N. Privacy and synthetic datasets. Stanf Technol Law Rev. 2019; 22(1):1–52.

20. Dwork C, Roth A. The algorithmic foundations of differential privacy. Found Trends Theor Comput Sci. 2014; 9(3–4):211–407.

21. Kaye J, Whitley EA, Lund D, Morrison M, Teare H, Melham K. Dynamic consent: a patient interface for twenty-first century research networks. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015; 23(2):141–6.

22. All of Us Research Program Investigators. The “All of Us” Research Program. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381(7):668–76.

23. Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJ, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A, et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data. 2016; 3:160018.

24. Korea Data Agency. K-DATA [Internet]. Seoul, Korea: Korea Data Agency;2021. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: http://global.kdata.or.kr/en/kdata/ .

25. Jeon JH, Lee KC. Top 10 key standardization trends and perspectives on artificial intelligence in medicine. Electron Telecommun Trends. 2020; 35(2):1–16.

26. National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency. Case report of new medical technology evaluation [Internet]. Seoul, Korea: National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency;2020. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://nhta.neca.re.kr/nhta/publication/nhtaU0605V.ecg?seq=8970 .

27. Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices. The fast-track process for Digital Health Applications (DiGA) according to Section 139e SGB V [Internet]. Bonn, Germany: Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices;2020. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.bfarm.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/MedicalDevices/DiGA_Guide.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 .

28. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. New medical services and new technologies [Internet]. Baltimore (MD): Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services;2021. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/newtech/ .

29. Federal Register. Medicare Program: Medicare coverage of innovative technology (MCIT) and definition of “Reasonable and Necessary”: delay of effective date [Internet]. Washington (DC): Federal Register;2021. [cited at 2022 Jan 10]. Available form: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/18/2021-10466/medicareprogram-medicare-coverage-of-innovative-technologymcit-and-definition-of-reasonable-and .