Exploring doctors' perspectives on generative-AI and diagnostic-decision-support systems.

IF 4.4 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Saba Esnaashari, Youmna Hashem, John Francis, Deborah Morgan, Anton Poletaev, Jonathan Bright
{"title":"Exploring doctors' perspectives on generative-AI and diagnostic-decision-support systems.","authors":"Saba Esnaashari, Youmna Hashem, John Francis, Deborah Morgan, Anton Poletaev, Jonathan Bright","doi":"10.1136/bmjhci-2024-101371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This research presents key findings from a project exploring UK doctors' perspectives on artificial intelligence (AI) in their work. Despite a growing interest in the use of AI in medicine, studies have yet to explore a representative sample of doctors' perspectives on, and experiences with, making use of different types of AI. Our research seeks to fill this gap by presenting findings from a survey exploring doctors' perceptions and experiences of using a variety of AI systems in their work. A sample of 929 doctors on the UK medical register participated in a survey between December 2023 and January 2024 which asked a range of questions about their understanding and use of AI systems.Overall, 29% of respondents reported using some form of AI in their practice within the last 12 months, with diagnostic-decision-support (16%) and generative-AI (16%) being the most prevalently used AI systems.We found that the majority of generative-AI users (62%) reported that these systems increase their productivity, and most diagnostic- decision-support users (62%) reported that the systems improve their clinical decision-making. More than half of doctors (52%) were optimistic about the integration of AI in healthcare, rising to 63% for AI users. Only 15% stated that advances in AI make them worried about their job security, with no significant difference between AI and non-AI users. However, there were relatively low reported levels of training, as well as understandings of risks and professional responsibilities, especially among generative-AI users. Just 12% of respondents agreed they have received sufficient training to understand their professional responsibilities when using AI, with this number decreasing to 8% for generative-AI users. We hope this work adds to the evidence base for policy-makers looking to support the integration of AI in healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":9050,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12306348/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Health & Care Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2024-101371","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This research presents key findings from a project exploring UK doctors' perspectives on artificial intelligence (AI) in their work. Despite a growing interest in the use of AI in medicine, studies have yet to explore a representative sample of doctors' perspectives on, and experiences with, making use of different types of AI. Our research seeks to fill this gap by presenting findings from a survey exploring doctors' perceptions and experiences of using a variety of AI systems in their work. A sample of 929 doctors on the UK medical register participated in a survey between December 2023 and January 2024 which asked a range of questions about their understanding and use of AI systems.Overall, 29% of respondents reported using some form of AI in their practice within the last 12 months, with diagnostic-decision-support (16%) and generative-AI (16%) being the most prevalently used AI systems.We found that the majority of generative-AI users (62%) reported that these systems increase their productivity, and most diagnostic- decision-support users (62%) reported that the systems improve their clinical decision-making. More than half of doctors (52%) were optimistic about the integration of AI in healthcare, rising to 63% for AI users. Only 15% stated that advances in AI make them worried about their job security, with no significant difference between AI and non-AI users. However, there were relatively low reported levels of training, as well as understandings of risks and professional responsibilities, especially among generative-AI users. Just 12% of respondents agreed they have received sufficient training to understand their professional responsibilities when using AI, with this number decreasing to 8% for generative-AI users. We hope this work adds to the evidence base for policy-makers looking to support the integration of AI in healthcare.

探索医生对生成人工智能和诊断决策支持系统的看法。
这项研究展示了一个项目的主要发现,该项目探索了英国医生在工作中对人工智能(AI)的看法。尽管人们对在医学中使用人工智能越来越感兴趣,但研究尚未探索医生对使用不同类型人工智能的观点和经验的代表性样本。我们的研究试图通过一项调查的结果来填补这一空白,该调查探讨了医生在工作中使用各种人工智能系统的看法和经验。在2023年12月至2024年1月期间,英国医疗注册的929名医生参加了一项调查,该调查询问了一系列关于他们对人工智能系统的理解和使用的问题。总体而言,29%的受访者表示在过去12个月内在他们的实践中使用了某种形式的人工智能,其中诊断决策支持(16%)和生成人工智能(16%)是最常用的人工智能系统。我们发现,大多数生成型人工智能用户(62%)报告说,这些系统提高了他们的生产力,大多数诊断决策支持用户(62%)报告说,这些系统改善了他们的临床决策。超过一半的医生(52%)对人工智能在医疗保健领域的整合持乐观态度,对人工智能用户持乐观态度的比例上升至63%。只有15%的人表示,人工智能的进步让他们担心自己的工作保障,人工智能用户和非人工智能用户之间没有显著差异。然而,据报道,培训水平相对较低,对风险和专业责任的理解也相对较低,尤其是在生成型人工智能用户中。只有12%的受访者认为他们在使用人工智能时接受了足够的培训,以了解他们的专业责任,而对于生成型人工智能用户,这一数字降至8%。我们希望这项工作能为政策制定者提供证据基础,以支持人工智能在医疗保健领域的整合。
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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.90%
发文量
40
审稿时长
18 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信