Skip to main content
Log in

Poor quality data, privacy, lack of certifications: the lethal triad of new technologies in intensive care

  • Correspondence
  • Published:
Intensive Care Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. van de Sande D, van Genderen ME, Huiskens J, Gommers D, van Bommel J (2021) Moving from bytes to bedside: a systematic review on the use of artificial intelligence in the intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 5:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-021-06446-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. O’Reilly-Shah VN, Gentry KR, Walters AM, Zivot J, Anderson CT, Tighe PJ (2020) Bias and ethical considerations in machine learning and the automation of perioperative risk assessment. Br J Anaesth 125(6):843–846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2020.07.040

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mehrabi N, Morstatter F, Saxena N, Lerman K, Galstyan A (2019) A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning 2019. http://arxiv.org/abs/1908.09635. Accessed 15 June 2021

  4. Price WN 2nd, Cohen IG (2019) Privacy in the age of medical big data. Nat Med 25(1):37–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-018-0272-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Cosgriff CV, Stone DJ, Weissman G, Pirracchio R, Celi LA (2020) The clinical artificial intelligence department: a prerequisite for success. BMJ Health Care Inform 27(1):e100183. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2020-100183

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding fees.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

VB: (1) made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; (2) drafted the work; (3) approved the version to be published; (4) agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. JM: (1) made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; (2) revised the work critically for important intellectual content; (3) approved the version to be published; (4) agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. EB: (1) made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; (2) drafted the work and revised it critically for important intellectual content; (3) approved the version to be published; (4) agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elena Bignami.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bellini, V., Montomoli, J. & Bignami, E. Poor quality data, privacy, lack of certifications: the lethal triad of new technologies in intensive care. Intensive Care Med 47, 1052–1053 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-021-06473-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-021-06473-4

Navigation