术语
结果(博弈论)
人工智能
透视图(图形)
机器学习
主题(文档)
光学(聚焦)
计算机科学
数据科学
数学
万维网
哲学
语言学
物理
数理经济学
光学
作者
Evan M. Polce,Kyle N. Kunze
出处
期刊:Arthroscopy
[Elsevier]
日期:2022-05-10
卷期号:39 (2): 151-158
被引量:11
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.arthro.2022.04.016
摘要
With the plethora of machine learning (ML) analyses published in the orthopaedic literature within the last 5 years, several attempts have been made to enhance our understanding of what exactly ML means and how it is used. At its most fundamental level, ML comprises a branch of artificial intelligence that uses algorithms to analyze and learn from patterns in data without explicit programming or human intervention. On the other hand, traditional statistics require a user to specifically choose variables of interest to create a model capable of predicting an outcome, the output of which (1) may be falsely influenced by the variables chosen to be included by the user and (2) does not allow for optimization of performance. Early publications have served as succinct editorials or reviews intended to ease audiences unfamiliar with ML into the complexities that accompany the subject. Most commonly, the focus of these studies concerns the terminology and concepts surrounding ML because it is important to understand the rationale behind performing such studies. Unfortunately, these publications only touch on the most basic aspects of ML and are too frequently repetitive. Indeed, the conclusion of these articles reiterate that the potential clinical utility of these algorithms remains tangential at best in their current form and caution against premature adoption without external validation. By doing so, our perspective and ability to draw our own conclusions from these studies have not advanced, and we are left concluding with each subsequent study that a new algorithm is published for an outcome of interest that cannot be used until further validation. What readers now need is to regress to embrace the principles of the scientific method that they have used to critically assess vast numbers of publications before this wave of newly applied statistical methodology-a guide to interpret results such that their own conclusions can be drawn. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI