Cognitive biases in AI-assisted medical decision making: A structured review as a primer for veterinary and human pathology.

IF 2.3 2区 农林科学 Q2 PATHOLOGY
Emely Rosbach, Jonas Ammeling, Christof A Bertram, Andreas Riener, Marc Aubreville
{"title":"Cognitive biases in AI-assisted medical decision making: A structured review as a primer for veterinary and human pathology.","authors":"Emely Rosbach, Jonas Ammeling, Christof A Bertram, Andreas Riener, Marc Aubreville","doi":"10.1177/03009858261472493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of error in human thinking. While artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support systems offer great potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in pathology, collaboration between medical professionals and AI can also introduce or amplify these biases. This review aims to identify cognitive biases and their modes of manifestation in human-computer interaction (HCI) within pathology and to extrapolate potential manifestations of biases not yet explored in this domain but reported in HCIs across other medical specialties. We conducted a structured literature review (19 August 2025) across the ACM, IEEE, and PubMed databases. Studies were eligible if they operationalized cognitive biases during expert-machine interaction in diagnostic decision-making using qualitative or quantitative methods, including review articles citing primary studies that met these criteria. The final corpus comprised 24 studies (8 primary studies and 16 review articles). From these review articles, 18 additional primary studies were extracted and used in their place solely for analysis purposes. A narrative synthesis of the identified primary research revealed 12 cognitive biases reported in AI-assisted medical decision-making, with only one study originating from pathology. For each bias, definitions and hypothetical pathology-specific examples were derived. This review is intended as a primer for the veterinary and human pathology communities and strives to contribute to the safe and effective integration of AI into diagnostic practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":23513,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Pathology","volume":" ","pages":"3009858261472493"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03009858261472493","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of error in human thinking. While artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support systems offer great potential to enhance diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in pathology, collaboration between medical professionals and AI can also introduce or amplify these biases. This review aims to identify cognitive biases and their modes of manifestation in human-computer interaction (HCI) within pathology and to extrapolate potential manifestations of biases not yet explored in this domain but reported in HCIs across other medical specialties. We conducted a structured literature review (19 August 2025) across the ACM, IEEE, and PubMed databases. Studies were eligible if they operationalized cognitive biases during expert-machine interaction in diagnostic decision-making using qualitative or quantitative methods, including review articles citing primary studies that met these criteria. The final corpus comprised 24 studies (8 primary studies and 16 review articles). From these review articles, 18 additional primary studies were extracted and used in their place solely for analysis purposes. A narrative synthesis of the identified primary research revealed 12 cognitive biases reported in AI-assisted medical decision-making, with only one study originating from pathology. For each bias, definitions and hypothetical pathology-specific examples were derived. This review is intended as a primer for the veterinary and human pathology communities and strives to contribute to the safe and effective integration of AI into diagnostic practice.

人工智能辅助医疗决策中的认知偏差:作为兽医和人类病理学入门的结构化回顾。
认知偏差是人类思维中系统性的错误模式。虽然基于人工智能(AI)的决策支持系统在提高病理学诊断准确性和效率方面具有巨大潜力,但医疗专业人员与AI之间的合作也可能引入或放大这些偏见。本综述旨在识别病理学中人机交互(HCI)中的认知偏差及其表现模式,并推断尚未在该领域探索但在其他医学专业的HCI中报道的偏见的潜在表现。我们对ACM、IEEE和PubMed数据库进行了结构化的文献综述(2025年8月19日)。如果研究使用定性或定量方法在诊断决策中的专家-机器交互过程中操作认知偏差,包括引用符合这些标准的原始研究的评论文章,则研究合格。最终的语料库包括24项研究(8项主要研究和16篇综述文章)。从这些综述文章中,提取了另外18项主要研究,并仅用于分析目的。对已确定的主要研究进行的叙述综合显示,在人工智能辅助医疗决策中报告了12种认知偏差,其中只有一项研究来自病理学。对于每一个偏倚,定义和假设的病理特异性的例子推导。这篇综述旨在作为兽医和人类病理学社区的入门,并努力为将人工智能安全有效地整合到诊断实践中做出贡献。
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
Veterinary Pathology
Veterinary Pathology 农林科学-病理学
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
99
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Veterinary Pathology (VET) is the premier international publication of basic and applied research involving domestic, laboratory, wildlife, marine and zoo animals, and poultry. Bridging the divide between natural and experimental diseases, the journal details the diagnostic investigations of diseases of animals; reports experimental studies on mechanisms of specific processes; provides unique insights into animal models of human disease; and presents studies on environmental and pharmaceutical hazards.
×
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
小红书