The automation of the medical evidence acquisition and diagnosis process has recently attracted increasing attention in order to reduce the workload of doctors and democratize access to medical care. However, most works proposed in the machine learning literature focus solely on improving the prediction accuracy of a patient's pathology. We argue that this objective is insufficient to ensure doctors' acceptability of such systems. In their initial interaction with patients, doctors do not only focus on identifying the pathology a patient is suffering from; they instead generate a differential diagnosis (in the form of a short list of plausible diseases) because the medical evidence collected from patients is often insufficient to establish a final diagnosis. Moreover, doctors explicitly explore severe pathologies before potentially ruling them out from the differential, especially in acute care settings. Finally, for doctors to trust a system's recommendations, they need to understand how the gathered evidences led to the predicted diseases. In particular, interactions between a system and a patient need to emulate the reasoning of doctors. We therefore propose to model the evidence acquisition and automatic diagnosis tasks using a deep reinforcement learning framework that considers three essential aspects of a doctor's reasoning, namely generating a differential diagnosis using an exploration-confirmation approach while prioritizing severe pathologies. We propose metrics for evaluating interaction quality based on these three aspects. We show that our approach performs better than existing models while maintaining competitive pathology prediction accuracy.
翻译:医疗证据的获取和诊断过程自动化最近引起越来越多的关注,以减少医生的工作量和使获得医疗护理的民主化。然而,机器学习文献中提议的大多数工作都仅仅侧重于提高病人病理学的预测准确性。我们争辩说,这一目标不足以确保医生接受这种系统。在与病人的最初互动中,医生不仅侧重于确定病人所患病理学;相反,他们产生的诊断有差异(以短长的貌似疾病清单的形式),因为从病人那里收集的医疗证据往往不足以确立最终诊断。此外,医生们明确探讨严重病理,然后可能将其排除在差异之外,特别是在急性护理环境中。最后,医生们要相信系统的建议,他们需要了解所收集的证据如何导致预测的疾病。特别是,系统与病人之间的互动需要效仿医生的推理。因此,我们提议用一种深厚的强化学习框架来模拟证据的获取和自动诊断任务,这种框架考虑到医生推理的三个基本方面,即利用探索-确认方法产生差异性诊断,而可能将其排除出差异,特别是在急性护理环境中。最后的诊断方法。最后要让医生们相信一个系统的建议,他们相信它是如何导致预测的疾病。我们所收集的证据是如何产生严重的方法,而我们则要用更精确的。我们用这些方法来评估以比较精确的方法来进行。我们以衡量方法。我们用这些方法来进行更精确的推论。我们用比较的推理学。我们用比较的推论。我们用比较的推论。我们用三个方法来比较的推论。我们用的方法来比较的推理。我们用的方法来比较的。我们用比较的推论。我们用比较的推论。我们用比较的推论。我们用比较的推论。我们比较的推理。我们用的方法提出比较的推论。