Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence and expert assessments in detecting neonatal procedural pain

Assessing pain in newborns in the NICU is crucial due to their frequent exposure to painful stimuli, yet it's challenging due to the subjective nature of current methods. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an AI system designed for automatic facial recognition by comparing its performance with the expert opinion of health care provider. This is a secondary analysis from an eye-tracking study, assessing neonatal pain evaluations by healthcare professionals. The performance of AI software, FaceReader 9, was compared to experts' evaluations using a visual-analog scale, focusing on identifying specific facial action units associated with different pain levels. The study found significant differences in AI-generated metrics-arousal and valence-across three stimulus types: non-noxious thermal, short-noxious, and prolonged-noxious, with p-values below 0.001. A strong correlation (r = 0.84, p ≤ .001) was observed between AI metrics and expert ratings. Eleven facial action units were identified as relevant to describe neonatal pain. The findings highlight the AI system's potential in accurately detecting and analyzing newborn facial expressions in response to varying pain intensities, demonstrating a significant correlation with healthcare professionals' assessments. This suggests that AI technology could enhance objective pain assessment in neonates.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-71278-6
Citations
9
Primary Topic
Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.98
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence and expert assessments in detecting neonatal procedural pain

Alexandra Luister, Eik Vettorazzi, Philipp Deindl, Dominique Singer et al.
9 citations
Scientific Reports
Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
9.98
article

Comparative analysis of artificial intelligence and expert assessments in detecting neonatal procedural pain

Alexandra Luister, Eik Vettorazzi, Philipp Deindl, Dominique Singer, Philipp Steinbauer, Vito Giordano, Michael Wagner, Angelika Berger, Krista Wonka, Nadine Pointner
article en
9 citations

Abstract

Assessing pain in newborns in the NICU is crucial due to their frequent exposure to painful stimuli, yet it's challenging due to the subjective nature of current methods. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an AI system designed for automatic facial recognition by comparing its performance with the expert opinion of health care provider. This is a secondary analysis from an eye-tracking study, assessing neonatal pain evaluations by healthcare professionals. The performance of AI software, FaceReader 9, was compared to experts' evaluations using a visual-analog scale, focusing on identifying specific facial action units associated with different pain levels. The study found significant differences in AI-generated metrics-arousal and valence-across three stimulus types: non-noxious thermal, short-noxious, and prolonged-noxious, with p-values below 0.001. A strong correlation (r = 0.84, p ≤ .001) was observed between AI metrics and expert ratings. Eleven facial action units were identified as relevant to describe neonatal pain. The findings highlight the AI system's potential in accurately detecting and analyzing newborn facial expressions in response to varying pain intensities, demonstrating a significant correlation with healthcare professionals' assessments. This suggests that AI technology could enhance objective pain assessment in neonates.

Scientific ReportsVol. 14(1)
Universität Hamburg (DE), University Hospital Bonn (DE), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE), Medical University of Vienna (AT)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
9.98
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.