Sharing data with third parties is essential for advancing science, but it is becoming more and more difficult with the rise of data protection regulations, ethical restrictions, and growing fear of misuse. Fully synthetic data, which transcends anonymisation, may be the key to unlocking valuable untapped insights stored away in secured data vaults. This review examines current synthetic data generation methods and their utility measurement. We found that more traditional generative models such as Classification and Regression Tree models alongside Bayesian Networks remain highly relevant and are still capable of surpassing deep learning alternatives like Generative Adversarial Networks. However, our findings also display the same lack of agreement on metrics for evaluation, uncovered in earlier reviews, posing a persistent obstacle to advancing the field. We propose a tool for evaluating the utility of synthetic data and illustrate how it can be applied to three synthetic data generation models. By streamlining evaluation and promoting agreement on metrics, researchers can explore novel methods and generate compelling results that will convince data curators and lawmakers to embrace synthetic data. Our review emphasises the potential of synthetic data and highlights the need for greater collaboration and standardisation to unlock its full potential.

With the growing demand for synthetic data to address contemporary issues in machine learning, such as data scarcity, data fairness, and data privacy, having robust tools for assessing the utility and potential privacy risks of such data becomes crucial. SynthEval, a novel open-source evaluation framework distinguishes itself from existing tools by treating categorical and numerical attributes with equal care, without assuming any special kind of preprocessing steps. This makes it applicable to virtually any synthetic dataset of tabular records. Our tool leverages statistical and machine learning techniques to comprehensively evaluate synthetic data fidelity and privacy-preserving integrity. SynthEval integrates a wide selection of metrics that can be used independently or in highly customisable benchmark configurations, and can easily be extended with additional metrics. In this paper, we describe SynthEval and illustrate its versatility with examples. The framework facilitates better benchmarking and more consistent comparisons of model capabilities.

Healthcare systems are confronted with a multitude of challenges, including the imperative to enhance accessibility, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and the quality of healthcare delivery. These challenges are exacerbated by current healthcare personnel shortages, prospects of future shortfalls, insufficient recruitment efforts, increasing prevalence of chronic diseases, global viral concerns, and ageing populations. To address this escalating demand for healthcare services, healthcare systems are increasingly adopting robotic technology and artificial intelligence (AI), which promise to optimise costs, improve working conditions, and increase the quality of care. This article focuses on deepening our understanding of the barriers and facilitators associated with integrating robotic technologies in hospital environments. To this end, we conducted a scoping literature review to consolidate emerging themes pertaining to the experiences, viewpoints perspectives, and behaviours of hospital employees as professional users of robots in hospitals. Through screening 501 original research articles from Web-of-Science, we identified and reviewed in full-text 40 pertinent user-centric studies of the integration of robots into hospitals. Our review revealed and analysed 14 themes in-depth, of which we identified seven as barriers and seven as facilitators. Through a structuring of the barriers and facilitators, we reveal a notable misalignment between these barriers and facilitators: Finding that organisational aspects are at the core of most barriers, we suggest that future research should investigate the dynamics between hospital employees as professional users and the procedures and workflows of the hospitals as institutions, as well as the ambivalent role of anthropomorphisation of hospital robots, and emerging issues of privacy and confidentiality raised by increasingly communicative robots. Ultimately, this perspective on the integration of robots in hospitals transcends debates on the capabilities and limits of the robotic technology itself, shedding light on the complexity of integrating new technologies into hospital environments and contributing to an understanding of possible futures in healthcare innovation.

Data sharing is a necessity for innovative progress in many domains, especially in healthcare. However, the ability to share data is hindered by regulations protecting the privacy of natural persons. Synthetic tabular data provide a promising solution to address data sharing difficulties but does not inherently guarantee privacy. Still, there is a lack of agreement on appropriate methods for assessing the privacy-preserving capabilities of synthetic data, making it difficult to compare results across studies. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to identify properties that constitute good universal privacy evaluation metrics for synthetic tabular data. The goal of universally applicable metrics is to enable comparability across studies and to allow nontechnical stakeholders to understand how privacy is protected. We identify four principles for the assessment of metrics: Comparability, Applicability, Interpretability, and Representativeness (CAIR). To quantify and rank the degree to which evaluation metrics conform to the CAIR principles, we design a rubric using a scale of 1-4. Each of the four properties is scored on four parameters, yielding 16 total dimensions. We study the applicability and usefulness of the CAIR principles and rubric by assessing a selection of metrics popular in other studies. The results provide granular insights into the strengths and weaknesses of existing metrics that not only rank the metrics but highlight areas of potential improvements. We expect that the CAIR principles will foster agreement among researchers and organizations on which universal privacy evaluation metrics are appropriate for synthetic tabular data.

Expressive evaluation metrics are indispensable for informative experiments in all areas, and while several metrics are established in some areas, in others, such as feature selection, only indirect or otherwise limited evaluation metrics are found. In this paper, we propose a novel evaluation metric to address several problems of its predecessors and allow for flexible and reliable evaluation of feature selection algorithms. The proposed metric is a dynamic metric with two properties that can be used to evaluate both the performance and the stability of a feature selection algorithm. We conduct several empirical experiments to illustrate the use of the proposed metric in the successful evaluation of feature selection algorithms. We also provide a comparison and analysis to show the different aspects involved in the evaluation of the feature selection algorithms. The results indicate that the proposed metric is successful in carrying out the evaluation task for feature selection algorithms.

Objectives The advent of conversational artificial intelligence (AI) systems employing large language models such as ChatGPT has sparked public, professional and academic debates on the capabilities of such technologies. This mixed-methods study sets out to review and systematically explore the capabilities of ChatGPT to adequately provide health advice to patients when prompted regarding four topics from the field of cardiovascular diseases.Methods As of 30 May 2023, 528 items on PubMed contained the term ChatGPT in their title and/or abstract, with 258 being classified as journal articles and included in our thematic state-of-the-art review. For the experimental part, we systematically developed and assessed 123 prompts across the four topics based on three classes of users and two languages. Medical and communications experts scored ChatGPT’s responses according to the 4Cs of language model evaluation proposed in this article: correct, concise, comprehensive and comprehensible.Results The articles reviewed were fairly evenly distributed across discussing how ChatGPT could be used for medical publishing, in clinical practice and for education of medical personnel and/or patients. Quantitatively and qualitatively assessing the capability of ChatGPT on the 123 prompts demonstrated that, while the responses generally received above-average scores, they occupy a spectrum from the concise and correct via the absurd to what only can be described as hazardously incorrect and incomplete. Prompts formulated at higher levels of health literacy generally yielded higher-quality answers. Counterintuitively, responses in a lower-resource language were often of higher quality.Conclusions The results emphasise the relationship between prompt and response quality and hint at potentially concerning futures in personalised medicine. The widespread use of large language models for health advice might amplify existing health inequalities and will increase the pressure on healthcare systems by providing easy access to many seemingly likely differential diagnoses and recommendations for seeing a doctor for even harmless ailments.