% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Reinhart:1023470,
author = {Reinhart, Lisa and Bischops, Anne C. and Kerth, Janna-Lina
and Hagemeister, Maurus and Heinrichs, Bert and Eickhoff,
Simon B. and Dukart, Jürgen and Konrad, Kerstin and
Mayatepek, Ertan and Meissner, Thomas},
title = {{A}rtificial intelligence in child development monitoring:
{A} systematic review on usage, outcomes and acceptance},
journal = {Intelligence-based medicine},
volume = {9},
issn = {2666-5212},
address = {Amsterdam},
publisher = {Elsevier},
reportid = {FZJ-2024-01703},
pages = {100134 -},
year = {2024},
abstract = {ObjectivesRecent advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI)
offer promising opportunities for its use in pediatric
healthcare. This is especially true for early identification
of developmental problems where timely intervention is
essential, but developmental assessments are
resource-intensive. AI carries potential as a valuable tool
in the early detection of such developmental issues. In this
systematic review, we aim to synthesize and evaluate the
current literature on AI-usage in monitoring child
development, including possible clinical outcomes, and
acceptability of such technologies by different
stakeholders.Material and methodsThe systematic review is
based on a literature search comprising the databases
PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, Science
Direct, PsycInfo, ACM and Google Scholar (time interval
1996–2022). All articles addressing AI-usage in monitoring
child development or describing respective clinical outcomes
and opinions were included.ResultsOut of 2814 identified
articles, finally 71 were included. 70 reported on AI usage
and one study dealt with users’ acceptance of AI. No
article reported on potential clinical outcomes of AI
applications. Articles showed a peak from 2020 to 2022. The
majority of studies were from the US, China and India (n =
45) and mostly used pre-existing datasets such as electronic
health records or speech and video recordings. The most used
AI methods were support vector machines and deep
learning.ConclusionA few well-proven AI applications in
developmental monitoring exist. However, the majority has
not been evaluated in clinical practice. The subdomains of
cognitive, social and language development are particularly
well-represented. Another focus is on early detection of
autism. Potential clinical outcomes of AI usage and user's
acceptance have rarely been considered yet. While the
increase of publications in recent years suggests an
increasing interest in AI implementation in child
development monitoring, future research should focus on
clinical practice application and stakeholder's needs.},
cin = {INM-7 / INM-11},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)INM-11-20170113},
pnm = {5255 - Neuroethics and Ethics of Information (POF4-525) /
5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability
(POF4-525)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5255 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
doi = {10.1016/j.ibmed.2024.100134},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1023470},
}