(This is an excerpt of the Health Rounds newsletter, where we present latest medical studies on Tuesdays and Thursdays)
Dec 17 (Reuters) – Applying an insecticide treatment used for soldiers’ uniforms to the cloths used to carry babies significantly reduced incidence of malaria in the children, researchers found.
The six-month study conducted in regions of Uganda where malaria is endemic included 400 mothers and their babies, ages 6 months to 18 months. Half were randomly assigned to use cotton cloth wraps treated with Sawyer Products’ permethrin, while the others received cloths treated with plain water as a control group. The wraps underwent retreatment every 4 weeks.
All of the pairs received insecticide-treated sleeping nets.
The permethrin-treated baby wraps reduced malaria cases in infants by 66%, according to a report of the study published in The New England Journal of Medicine.
Adverse events were mild, and the frequency was low and similar in the treatment group and the sham group, the report said.
“Given the anticipated duration and frequency of use… extended follow-up of children, particularly for neurodevelopmental effects of permethrin exposure, is needed,” the researchers acknowledge.
“Yet malaria, both severe and uncomplicated forms, can cause long-term cognitive impairment, and a careful weighing of potential risks and benefits will be required.”
AI REQUIRES NUANCED TRAINING TO FIND CANCER IN LOWER-RISK GROUPS
Two recent studies highlight the potential for artificial intelligence tools to be less accurate in some patients than others, if the tools are not trained properly.
It’s well known that if AI tools are trained on data collected from unequal proportions of patients from various demographic groups, they have a harder time making an accurate diagnosis in minority groups that aren’t well-represented in the training set.
But in the current analysis, the models sometimes performed worse in one demographic group even when the sample sizes were comparable, researchers reported in Cell Reports Medicine.
The reason may be that some cancers are more common in certain groups, so the models become better at making a diagnosis in those groups. As a result, the models may have difficulty diagnosing cancers in populations where they aren’t as common, the researchers discovered.
In addition, subtle molecular differences may exist in biopsy samples from different demographic groups, and AI may detect those differences and use them as a proxy for cancer type, potentially making it less effective at diagnosis in populations in which these mutations are less common.
“We found that because AI is so powerful, it can differentiate many obscure biological signals that cannot be detected by standard human evaluation,” study leader Kun-Hsing Yu of Harvard Medical School said in a statement.
As a result, the models may pick up signals that are more related to demographics than disease – and inferring demographic information from pathology slides could affect their diagnostic ability across groups.
Together, Yu said, these explanations suggest that bias in pathology AI stems not only from the variable quality of the training data but also from how researchers train the models.
When his team applied a new framework to the models they’d tested, it reduced the diagnostic disparities by some 88%, they said.
“We show that by making this small adjustment, the models can learn robust features that make them more generalizable and fairer across different populations,” Yu said.
The finding is encouraging, he added, because it suggests that bias can be reduced even without training the models on completely fair, representative data.
In a separate study published in PLOS Biology, researchers found that even with broad samples of bacterial populations, bias may be blocking the potential of AI to predict and combat antibiotic resistance.
(To receive the full newsletter in your inbox for free sign up here)
(Reporting by Nancy Lapid; Editing by Bill Berkrot)
Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
