Primary Care Provider Preferences Regarding Artificial Intelligence in Point-of-Care Cancer Screening.

IF 1.9 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
MDM Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2025-04-04 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/23814683251329007
Vinayak S Ahluwalia, Marilyn M Schapira, Gary E Weissman, Ravi B Parikh
{"title":"Primary Care Provider Preferences Regarding Artificial Intelligence in Point-of-Care Cancer Screening.","authors":"Vinayak S Ahluwalia, Marilyn M Schapira, Gary E Weissman, Ravi B Parikh","doi":"10.1177/23814683251329007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background.</b> It is unclear how to optimize the user interface and user experience of cancer screening artificial intelligence (AI) tools for clinical decision-making in primary care. <b>Methods.</b> We developed an electronic survey for US primary care clinicians to assess 1) general attitudes toward AI in cancer screening and 2) preferences for various aspects of AI model deployment in the context of colorectal, breast, and lung cancer screening. We descriptively analyzed the responses. <b>Results.</b> Ninety-nine surveys met criteria for analysis out of 733 potential respondents (response rate 14%). Ninety (>90%) somewhat or strongly agreed that their medical education did not provide adequate AI training. A plurality (52%, 39%, and 37% for colon, breast, and lung cancers, respectively) preferred that AI tools recommend the interval to the next screening as compared with the 5-y probability of future cancer diagnosis, a binary recommendation of \"screen now,\" or identification of suspicious imaging findings. In terms of workflow, respondents preferred generating a flag in the electronic health record to communicate an AI prediction versus an interactive smartphone application or the delegation of findings to another healthcare professional. No majority preference emerged for an explainability method for breast cancer screening. <b>Limitations.</b> The sample was primarily obtained from a single health care system in the Northeast. <b>Conclusions.</b> Providers indicated that AI models can be most helpful in cancer screening by providing prescriptive outputs, such as recommended intervals until next screening, and by integrating with the electronic health record. <b>Implications.</b> A preliminary framework for AI model development in cancer screening may help ensure effective integration into clinical workflow. These findings can better inform how healthcare systems govern and receive reimbursement for services that use AI.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Clinicians do not feel their undergraduate or graduate medical education has properly prepared them to engage with AI in patient care.We provide a preliminary framework for deploying AI models in primary care-based cancer screening.This framework may have implications for health system governance and provider reimbursement in the age of AI.</p>","PeriodicalId":36567,"journal":{"name":"MDM Policy and Practice","volume":"10 1","pages":"23814683251329007"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11970086/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MDM Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23814683251329007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. It is unclear how to optimize the user interface and user experience of cancer screening artificial intelligence (AI) tools for clinical decision-making in primary care. Methods. We developed an electronic survey for US primary care clinicians to assess 1) general attitudes toward AI in cancer screening and 2) preferences for various aspects of AI model deployment in the context of colorectal, breast, and lung cancer screening. We descriptively analyzed the responses. Results. Ninety-nine surveys met criteria for analysis out of 733 potential respondents (response rate 14%). Ninety (>90%) somewhat or strongly agreed that their medical education did not provide adequate AI training. A plurality (52%, 39%, and 37% for colon, breast, and lung cancers, respectively) preferred that AI tools recommend the interval to the next screening as compared with the 5-y probability of future cancer diagnosis, a binary recommendation of "screen now," or identification of suspicious imaging findings. In terms of workflow, respondents preferred generating a flag in the electronic health record to communicate an AI prediction versus an interactive smartphone application or the delegation of findings to another healthcare professional. No majority preference emerged for an explainability method for breast cancer screening. Limitations. The sample was primarily obtained from a single health care system in the Northeast. Conclusions. Providers indicated that AI models can be most helpful in cancer screening by providing prescriptive outputs, such as recommended intervals until next screening, and by integrating with the electronic health record. Implications. A preliminary framework for AI model development in cancer screening may help ensure effective integration into clinical workflow. These findings can better inform how healthcare systems govern and receive reimbursement for services that use AI.

Highlights: Clinicians do not feel their undergraduate or graduate medical education has properly prepared them to engage with AI in patient care.We provide a preliminary framework for deploying AI models in primary care-based cancer screening.This framework may have implications for health system governance and provider reimbursement in the age of AI.

初级保健提供者对人工智能在护理点癌症筛查方面的偏好。
背景。目前尚不清楚如何优化用于初级保健临床决策的癌症筛查人工智能(AI)工具的用户界面和用户体验。方法。我们为美国初级保健临床医生开展了一项电子调查,以评估1)对人工智能在癌症筛查中的普遍态度,以及2)在结直肠癌、乳腺癌和肺癌筛查中对人工智能模型部署的各个方面的偏好。我们描述性地分析了这些反应。结果。在733名潜在受访者中,99项调查符合分析标准(回复率14%)。90%的人多少或强烈同意他们的医学教育没有提供足够的人工智能培训。多数人(分别为52%、39%和37%的结肠癌、乳腺癌和肺癌患者)更倾向于人工智能工具推荐下一次筛查的间隔时间,而不是未来癌症诊断的5倍概率、“现在筛查”的二元建议,或识别可疑的影像学发现。在工作流程方面,受访者更喜欢在电子健康记录中生成一个标志来传达人工智能预测,而不是通过交互式智能手机应用程序或将结果委托给其他医疗保健专业人员。对于乳腺癌筛查的可解释性方法,没有出现大多数人的偏好。的局限性。样本主要来自东北部的单一医疗保健系统。结论。提供者表示,人工智能模型通过提供规定性输出(例如下次筛查前的推荐间隔时间)以及与电子健康记录集成,对癌症筛查最有帮助。的影响。癌症筛查人工智能模型开发的初步框架可能有助于确保有效整合到临床工作流程中。这些发现可以更好地为医疗保健系统如何管理和获得使用人工智能服务的报销提供信息。重点:临床医生认为他们的本科或研究生医学教育没有为他们在患者护理中使用人工智能做好适当的准备。我们为在基于初级保健的癌症筛查中部署人工智能模型提供了一个初步框架。这一框架可能对人工智能时代的卫生系统治理和提供者报销产生影响。
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
MDM Policy and Practice
MDM Policy and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
15 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