Prioritizing Trust in Podiatrists' Preference for AI in Supportive Roles Over Diagnostic Roles in Health Care: Qualitative Interview and Focus Group Study.

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.2196/59010
Mohammed A Tahtali, Chris C P Snijders, Corné W G M Dirne, Pascale M Le Blanc
{"title":"Prioritizing Trust in Podiatrists' Preference for AI in Supportive Roles Over Diagnostic Roles in Health Care: Qualitative Interview and Focus Group Study.","authors":"Mohammed A Tahtali, Chris C P Snijders, Corné W G M Dirne, Pascale M Le Blanc","doi":"10.2196/59010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As artificial intelligence (AI) evolves, its roles have expanded from helping out with routine tasks to making complex decisions, once the exclusive domain of human experts. This shift is pronounced in health care, where AI aids in tasks ranging from image recognition in radiology to personalized treatment plans, demonstrating the potential to, at times, surpass human accuracy and efficiency. Despite AI's accuracy in some critical tasks, the adoption of AI in health care is a challenge, in part because of skepticism about being able to rely on AI decisions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to identify and delve into more effective and acceptable ways of integrating AI into a broader spectrum of health care tasks.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 2 qualitative phases to explore podiatrists' views on AI in health care. Initially, we interviewed 9 podiatrists (7 women and 2 men) with a mean age of 41 (SD 12) years and aimed to capture their sentiments regarding the use and role of AI in their work. Subsequently, a focus group with 5 podiatrists (4 women and 1 man) with a mean age of 54 (SD 10) years delved into AI's supportive and diagnostic roles on the basis of the interviews. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using Atlas.ti and QDA-Miner, using both thematic analysis for broad patterns and framework analysis for structured insights per established guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our research unveiled 9 themes and 3 subthemes, clarifying podiatrists' nuanced views on AI in health care. Key overlapping insights in the 2 phases included a preference for using AI in supportive roles, such as triage, because of its efficiency and process optimization capabilities. There is a discernible hesitancy toward leveraging AI for diagnostic purposes, driven by concerns regarding its accuracy and the essential nature of human expertise. The need for transparency and explainability in AI systems emerged as a critical factor for fostering trust in both phases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings highlight a complex view from podiatrists on AI, showing openness to its application in supportive roles while exercising caution with diagnostic use. This result is consistent with a careful introduction of AI into health care in roles, such as triage, in which there is initial trust, as opposed to roles that ask the AI for a complete diagnosis. Such strategic adoption can mitigate initial resistance, gradually building the confidence to explore AI's capabilities in more nuanced tasks, including diagnostics, where skepticism is currently more pronounced. Adopting AI stepwise could thus enhance trust and acceptance across a broader range of health care tasks, aligning technology integration with professional comfort and patient care standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"12 ","pages":"e59010"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11890136/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/59010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: As artificial intelligence (AI) evolves, its roles have expanded from helping out with routine tasks to making complex decisions, once the exclusive domain of human experts. This shift is pronounced in health care, where AI aids in tasks ranging from image recognition in radiology to personalized treatment plans, demonstrating the potential to, at times, surpass human accuracy and efficiency. Despite AI's accuracy in some critical tasks, the adoption of AI in health care is a challenge, in part because of skepticism about being able to rely on AI decisions.

Objective: This study aimed to identify and delve into more effective and acceptable ways of integrating AI into a broader spectrum of health care tasks.

Methods: We included 2 qualitative phases to explore podiatrists' views on AI in health care. Initially, we interviewed 9 podiatrists (7 women and 2 men) with a mean age of 41 (SD 12) years and aimed to capture their sentiments regarding the use and role of AI in their work. Subsequently, a focus group with 5 podiatrists (4 women and 1 man) with a mean age of 54 (SD 10) years delved into AI's supportive and diagnostic roles on the basis of the interviews. All interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using Atlas.ti and QDA-Miner, using both thematic analysis for broad patterns and framework analysis for structured insights per established guidelines.

Results: Our research unveiled 9 themes and 3 subthemes, clarifying podiatrists' nuanced views on AI in health care. Key overlapping insights in the 2 phases included a preference for using AI in supportive roles, such as triage, because of its efficiency and process optimization capabilities. There is a discernible hesitancy toward leveraging AI for diagnostic purposes, driven by concerns regarding its accuracy and the essential nature of human expertise. The need for transparency and explainability in AI systems emerged as a critical factor for fostering trust in both phases.

Conclusions: The findings highlight a complex view from podiatrists on AI, showing openness to its application in supportive roles while exercising caution with diagnostic use. This result is consistent with a careful introduction of AI into health care in roles, such as triage, in which there is initial trust, as opposed to roles that ask the AI for a complete diagnosis. Such strategic adoption can mitigate initial resistance, gradually building the confidence to explore AI's capabilities in more nuanced tasks, including diagnostics, where skepticism is currently more pronounced. Adopting AI stepwise could thus enhance trust and acceptance across a broader range of health care tasks, aligning technology integration with professional comfort and patient care standards.

在医疗保健中,足科医生对人工智能的支持作用优于诊断作用:定性访谈和焦点小组研究。
背景:随着人工智能(AI)的发展,它的角色已经从帮助完成日常任务扩展到做出复杂的决策,而这曾经是人类专家的专属领域。这种转变在医疗保健领域尤为明显,人工智能在从放射学的图像识别到个性化治疗计划的各种任务中发挥着辅助作用,有时显示出超越人类准确性和效率的潜力。尽管人工智能在一些关键任务中具有准确性,但在医疗保健领域采用人工智能仍是一项挑战,部分原因是人们对能否依赖人工智能决策持怀疑态度。目的:本研究旨在确定并深入研究将人工智能整合到更广泛的医疗保健任务中的更有效和可接受的方法。方法:采用2个定性阶段,探讨足科医生对人工智能在医疗保健中的看法。最初,我们采访了9名足科医生(7名女性和2名男性),平均年龄为41岁(SD 12),旨在了解他们对人工智能在工作中的使用和作用的看法。随后,一个由5名平均年龄为54岁(SD 10)的足病医生(4女1男)组成的焦点小组在访谈的基础上深入研究了人工智能的支持和诊断作用。所有访谈都被记录下来,逐字转录,并使用Atlas进行分析。ti和QDA-Miner,使用主题分析来获得广泛的模式,并根据已建立的指导方针使用框架分析来获得结构化的见解。结果:我们的研究揭示了9个主题和3个副主题,阐明了足病医生对人工智能在医疗保健中的细微差别。在这两个阶段中,关键重叠的见解包括偏爱在支持性角色中使用AI,比如分流,因为它的效率和流程优化能力。由于担心人工智能的准确性和人类专业知识的本质,人们对将人工智能用于诊断目的存在明显的犹豫。人工智能系统对透明度和可解释性的需求成为在这两个阶段培养信任的关键因素。结论:研究结果突出了足科医生对人工智能的复杂看法,他们对人工智能在辅助角色中的应用持开放态度,同时对诊断使用持谨慎态度。这一结果与将人工智能谨慎地引入医疗保健领域的角色一致,例如分诊,其中存在初步信任,而不是要求人工智能进行完整诊断的角色。这种战略性的采用可以减轻最初的阻力,逐渐建立信心,在更细微的任务中探索人工智能的能力,包括诊断,目前人们对这一领域的怀疑更为明显。因此,逐步采用人工智能可以增强更广泛的医疗保健任务的信任和接受度,使技术集成与专业舒适度和患者护理标准保持一致。
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
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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