ABSTRACT
Background There are concerns about the balance of benefits and harms in people using opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Technologies using artificial intelligence (AI) are being developed to examine and optimise the use of opioids. Yet, this research has not been synthesised to determine the types of AI models being developed and the application of these models.
Methods We aimed to synthesise studies exploring the use of AI in people taking opioids. We searched three databases: the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, and Medline, on 4 January 2021. Studies were included if they were published after 2010, conducted in a real-life community setting involving humans, and used AI to understand opioid use. Data on the types and applications of AI models were extracted and descriptively analysed.
Results Eighty-one articles were included in our review, representing over 5.3 million participants and 14.6 million social media posts. Most (93%) studies were conducted in the USA. The types of AI technologies included natural language processing (46%) and a range of machine learning algorithms, the most common being random forest algorithms (36%). AI was predominately applied for the surveillance and monitoring of opioids (46%), followed by risk prediction (42%), pain management (10%), and patient support (2%). Few of the AI models were ready for adoption, with most (62%) being in preliminary stages.
Conclusions A variety of AI models are being developed and applied to understand opioid use. However, there is a need for these AI technologies to be externally validated and robustly evaluated to determine whether they can improve the use and safety of opioids.
Key Points
Key Points Across the landscape of opioid research, natural language processing models (46%) and ensemble algorithms, particularly random forest algorithms (36%), were the most common types of AI technologies studied.
There were four main domains that AI was applied to assess the use of opioids, including surveillance and monitoring (46%), risk prediction (42%), pain management (10%), and patient support (2%).
The AI technologies were at various stages of development, validation, and deployment, with most (62%) models in preliminary stages, 11% required external validation, and few models were openly available to access (6%).
Competing Interest Statement
GCR was financially supported by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR), the Naji Foundation, and the Rotary Foundation to study for a Doctor of Philosophy (DPhil/PhD) at the University of Oxford (2017-2020). GCR is an Associate Editor of BMJ Evidence Based Medicine. No other study authors have interest to disclose.
Funding Statement
No funding was obtained or received for this research.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
All data is from published studies available from the respective journals.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript and appendices
