Assessing the impact of information on patient attitudes toward artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support (AI/CDS): a pilot web-based SMART vignette study.

IF 3.3 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Bohye Kim, Katie Ryan, Jane Paik Kim
{"title":"Assessing the impact of information on patient attitudes toward artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support (AI/CDS): a pilot web-based SMART vignette study.","authors":"Bohye Kim, Katie Ryan, Jane Paik Kim","doi":"10.1136/jme-2024-110080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>It is increasingly recognised that the success of artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support (AI/CDS) tools will depend on physician and patient trust, but factors impacting patients' views on clinical care reliant on AI have been less explored.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This pilot study explores whether, and in what contexts, detail of explanation provided about AI/CDS tools impacts patients' attitudes toward the tools and their clinical care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We designed a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial vignette web-based survey. Participants recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk were presented with hypothetical vignettes describing health concerns and were sequentially randomised along three factors: (1) the level of detail of explanation regarding an AI/CDS tool; (2) the AI/CDS result; and (3) the physician's level of agreement with the AI/CDS result. We compared mean ratings of comfort and confidence by the level of detail of explanation using t-tests. Regression models were fit to confirm conditional effects of detail of explanation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The detail of explanation provided regarding the AI/CDS tools was positively related to respondents' comfort and confidence in the usage of the tools and their perception of the physician's final decision. The effects of detail of explanation on their perception of the physician's final decision were different given the AI/CDS result and the physician's agreement or disagreement with the result.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>More information provided by physicians regarding the use of AI/CDS tools may improve patient attitudes toward healthcare involving AI/CDS tools in general and in certain contexts of the AI/CDS result and physician agreement.</p>","PeriodicalId":16317,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Ethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110080","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: It is increasingly recognised that the success of artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support (AI/CDS) tools will depend on physician and patient trust, but factors impacting patients' views on clinical care reliant on AI have been less explored.

Objective: This pilot study explores whether, and in what contexts, detail of explanation provided about AI/CDS tools impacts patients' attitudes toward the tools and their clinical care.

Methods: We designed a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial vignette web-based survey. Participants recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk were presented with hypothetical vignettes describing health concerns and were sequentially randomised along three factors: (1) the level of detail of explanation regarding an AI/CDS tool; (2) the AI/CDS result; and (3) the physician's level of agreement with the AI/CDS result. We compared mean ratings of comfort and confidence by the level of detail of explanation using t-tests. Regression models were fit to confirm conditional effects of detail of explanation.

Results: The detail of explanation provided regarding the AI/CDS tools was positively related to respondents' comfort and confidence in the usage of the tools and their perception of the physician's final decision. The effects of detail of explanation on their perception of the physician's final decision were different given the AI/CDS result and the physician's agreement or disagreement with the result.

Conclusions: More information provided by physicians regarding the use of AI/CDS tools may improve patient attitudes toward healthcare involving AI/CDS tools in general and in certain contexts of the AI/CDS result and physician agreement.

评估信息对患者对基于人工智能的临床决策支持(AI/CDS)态度的影响:一项基于网络的试点SMART小故事研究。
背景:人们越来越认识到,基于人工智能的临床决策支持(AI/CDS)工具的成功将取决于医生和患者的信任,但影响患者对依赖AI的临床护理的看法的因素却很少被探索。目的:本初步研究探讨AI/CDS工具的详细解释是否以及在何种情况下影响患者对工具和临床护理的态度。方法:我们设计了一项基于网络的顺序多任务随机试验调查。通过Amazon Mechanical Turk招募的参与者看到了描述健康问题的假想小插曲,并按照三个因素依次随机分配:(1)关于人工智能/CDS工具的解释细节程度;(2) AI/CDS结果;(3)医生对AI/CDS结果的同意程度。我们用t检验比较了舒适度和置信度的平均评分和解释的详细程度。拟合回归模型以证实解释细节的条件效应。结果:提供关于AI/CDS工具的详细解释与受访者对工具使用的舒适度和信心以及他们对医生最终决定的感知呈正相关。在AI/CDS结果和医生同意或不同意结果的情况下,解释细节对他们对医生最终决定的感知的影响是不同的。结论:医生提供的关于使用AI/CDS工具的更多信息可能会改善患者对涉及AI/CDS工具的医疗保健的态度,并在AI/CDS结果和医生同意的某些情况下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Ethics
Journal of Medical Ethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.80%
发文量
164
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Ethics is a leading international journal that reflects the whole field of medical ethics. The journal seeks to promote ethical reflection and conduct in scientific research and medical practice. It features articles on various ethical aspects of health care relevant to health care professionals, members of clinical ethics committees, medical ethics professionals, researchers and bioscientists, policy makers and patients. Subscribers to the Journal of Medical Ethics also receive Medical Humanities journal at no extra cost. JME is the official journal of the Institute of Medical Ethics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信