Hongyan Gu , Chunxu Yang , Shino Magaki , Neda Zarrin-Khameh , Nelli S. Lakis , Inma Cobos , Negar Khanlou , Xinhai R. Zhang , Jasmeet Assi , Joshua T. Byers , Ameer Hamza , Karam Han , Anders Meyer , Hilda Mirbaha , Carrie A. Mohila , Todd M. Stevens , Sara L. Stone , Wenzhong Yan , Mohammad Haeri , Xiang ‘Anthony’ Chen
{"title":"医生的多数投票提高了病理学领域对人工智能的依赖程度","authors":"Hongyan Gu , Chunxu Yang , Shino Magaki , Neda Zarrin-Khameh , Nelli S. Lakis , Inma Cobos , Negar Khanlou , Xinhai R. Zhang , Jasmeet Assi , Joshua T. Byers , Ameer Hamza , Karam Han , Anders Meyer , Hilda Mirbaha , Carrie A. Mohila , Todd M. Stevens , Sara L. Stone , Wenzhong Yan , Mohammad Haeri , Xiang ‘Anthony’ Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>As Artificial Intelligence (AI) making advancements in medical decision-making, there is a growing need to ensure doctors develop appropriate reliance on AI to avoid adverse outcomes. However, existing methods in enabling appropriate AI reliance might encounter challenges while being applied in the medical domain. With this regard, this work employs and provides the validation of an alternative approach – majority voting – to facilitate appropriate reliance on AI in medical decision-making. This is achieved by a multi-institutional user study involving 32 medical professionals with various backgrounds, focusing on the pathology task of visually detecting a pattern, mitoses, in tumor images. Here, the majority voting process was conducted by synthesizing decisions under AI assistance from a group of pathology doctors (pathologists). Two metrics were used to evaluate the appropriateness of AI reliance: Relative AI Reliance (RAIR) and Relative Self-Reliance (RSR). Results showed that even with groups of three pathologists, majority-voted decisions significantly increased both RAIR and RSR – by approximately 9% and 31%, respectively – compared to decisions made by one pathologist collaborating with AI. This increased appropriateness resulted in better precision and recall in the detection of mitoses. While our study is centered on pathology, we believe these insights can be extended to general high-stakes decision-making processes involving similar visual tasks.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54955,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","volume":"190 ","pages":"Article 103315"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000995/pdfft?md5=2e208cd70eb493c95c70b707fd06f211&pid=1-s2.0-S1071581924000995-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Majority voting of doctors improves appropriateness of AI reliance in pathology\",\"authors\":\"Hongyan Gu , Chunxu Yang , Shino Magaki , Neda Zarrin-Khameh , Nelli S. Lakis , Inma Cobos , Negar Khanlou , Xinhai R. Zhang , Jasmeet Assi , Joshua T. Byers , Ameer Hamza , Karam Han , Anders Meyer , Hilda Mirbaha , Carrie A. Mohila , Todd M. Stevens , Sara L. Stone , Wenzhong Yan , Mohammad Haeri , Xiang ‘Anthony’ Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103315\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>As Artificial Intelligence (AI) making advancements in medical decision-making, there is a growing need to ensure doctors develop appropriate reliance on AI to avoid adverse outcomes. However, existing methods in enabling appropriate AI reliance might encounter challenges while being applied in the medical domain. With this regard, this work employs and provides the validation of an alternative approach – majority voting – to facilitate appropriate reliance on AI in medical decision-making. This is achieved by a multi-institutional user study involving 32 medical professionals with various backgrounds, focusing on the pathology task of visually detecting a pattern, mitoses, in tumor images. Here, the majority voting process was conducted by synthesizing decisions under AI assistance from a group of pathology doctors (pathologists). Two metrics were used to evaluate the appropriateness of AI reliance: Relative AI Reliance (RAIR) and Relative Self-Reliance (RSR). Results showed that even with groups of three pathologists, majority-voted decisions significantly increased both RAIR and RSR – by approximately 9% and 31%, respectively – compared to decisions made by one pathologist collaborating with AI. This increased appropriateness resulted in better precision and recall in the detection of mitoses. While our study is centered on pathology, we believe these insights can be extended to general high-stakes decision-making processes involving similar visual tasks.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies\",\"volume\":\"190 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103315\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000995/pdfft?md5=2e208cd70eb493c95c70b707fd06f211&pid=1-s2.0-S1071581924000995-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000995\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Human-Computer Studies","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581924000995","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, CYBERNETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Majority voting of doctors improves appropriateness of AI reliance in pathology
As Artificial Intelligence (AI) making advancements in medical decision-making, there is a growing need to ensure doctors develop appropriate reliance on AI to avoid adverse outcomes. However, existing methods in enabling appropriate AI reliance might encounter challenges while being applied in the medical domain. With this regard, this work employs and provides the validation of an alternative approach – majority voting – to facilitate appropriate reliance on AI in medical decision-making. This is achieved by a multi-institutional user study involving 32 medical professionals with various backgrounds, focusing on the pathology task of visually detecting a pattern, mitoses, in tumor images. Here, the majority voting process was conducted by synthesizing decisions under AI assistance from a group of pathology doctors (pathologists). Two metrics were used to evaluate the appropriateness of AI reliance: Relative AI Reliance (RAIR) and Relative Self-Reliance (RSR). Results showed that even with groups of three pathologists, majority-voted decisions significantly increased both RAIR and RSR – by approximately 9% and 31%, respectively – compared to decisions made by one pathologist collaborating with AI. This increased appropriateness resulted in better precision and recall in the detection of mitoses. While our study is centered on pathology, we believe these insights can be extended to general high-stakes decision-making processes involving similar visual tasks.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Human-Computer Studies publishes original research over the whole spectrum of work relevant to the theory and practice of innovative interactive systems. The journal is inherently interdisciplinary, covering research in computing, artificial intelligence, psychology, linguistics, communication, design, engineering, and social organization, which is relevant to the design, analysis, evaluation and application of innovative interactive systems. Papers at the boundaries of these disciplines are especially welcome, as it is our view that interdisciplinary approaches are needed for producing theoretical insights in this complex area and for effective deployment of innovative technologies in concrete user communities.
Research areas relevant to the journal include, but are not limited to:
• Innovative interaction techniques
• Multimodal interaction
• Speech interaction
• Graphic interaction
• Natural language interaction
• Interaction in mobile and embedded systems
• Interface design and evaluation methodologies
• Design and evaluation of innovative interactive systems
• User interface prototyping and management systems
• Ubiquitous computing
• Wearable computers
• Pervasive computing
• Affective computing
• Empirical studies of user behaviour
• Empirical studies of programming and software engineering
• Computer supported cooperative work
• Computer mediated communication
• Virtual reality
• Mixed and augmented Reality
• Intelligent user interfaces
• Presence
...