IOS Pre-pressThis journal publishes all its articles in the IOS Press Pre-Press module. By publishing articles ahead of print the latest research can be accessed much quicker. The pre-press articles are the corrected proof versions of the article and are published online shortly after the proof is created and author corrections implemented. Pre-press articles are fully citable by using the DOI number. As soon as the pre-press article is assigned to an issue, the final bibliographic information will be added. The pre-press version will then be replaced by the updated, final version.
As a summary, the medical journal Radiology proposed a guide for authors, reviewers, and readers for assessing radiology research on artificial intelligence10. Other medical associations and journal editorial boards might adopt and customize it too. They also describe a checklist that every author should complete when publishing their A.I. research.
For over eight decades, the systematic investigation of historical records has guided various clinical research (Butler & Quinlan, 1958; Wu & Ashton, 1997). The scientific utilization of existing health records is common in epidemiological investigations (Haley et al., 1980; Jansen et al., 2005), quality assessment and improvement studies (Allison et al., 2000; Kirkorian, 1979), professional education and residency training (Holmboe, Gross, & Hawkins, 1996; Neidich, 1990; Pan, Fergusson, Schweitzer., & Hebert, 2005), examination of inpatient care (Ashton, Kuykendell, Johnson, Wray, & Wu, 1995; Wu & Ashton, 1997), and in clinical research (Hellings, 2004; Rajeev, Srinath, Girimaji, Seshadri, & Singh, 2004; Staller, Kunwar, & Simionescu, 2005). Investigations using retrospective chart reviews or health record reviews have been reported to comprise 25% of all scientific articles in emergency medical journals (Worster & Haines, 2004). In comparison, while a number of psychiatric studies have successfully extracted relevant data from systematic chart reviews (Baldassano, Ghaemi, Chang, Lyman, & Lipari, 2004; Barzman et al., 2004; Bloch et al., 2005; Dworkin, 1987; Goldstein & Schwebach, 2004; Grant, 2005; Henderson et al., 2004; Marchand, Wirth, & Simon, 2004; Staller, 2004), its application is frequently limited and research findings questioned. Consequently, retrospective research is often undervalued and, hence, underutilized in psychiatry. The reluctance to use this research methodology may result from the lack of clear benefits of this approach; minimizing its recognized methodology maintains the limitations. 2b1af7f3a8