Daniela Mahl, Mike S Schäfer, Stefan Adrian Voinea, Keyrellous Adib, Ben Duncan, Cristiana Salvi, David Novillo-Ortiz
{"title":"公共卫生中负责任的人工智能:关于风险沟通、社区参与和信息管理的德尔菲研究。","authors":"Daniela Mahl, Mike S Schäfer, Stefan Adrian Voinea, Keyrellous Adib, Ben Duncan, Cristiana Salvi, David Novillo-Ortiz","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) holds the potential to fundamentally transform how public health authorities use risk communication, community engagement and infodemic management (RCCE-IM) to prepare for, manage and mitigate public health emergencies. As research on this crucial transformation remains limited, we conducted a modified Delphi study on the impact of AI on RCCE-IM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In two successive surveys, 54 experts-scholars with expertise in public health, digital health, health communication, risk communication and AI, as well as RCCE-IM professionals-from 27 countries assessed opportunities, challenges and risks of AI, anticipated future scenarios, and identified principles and actions to facilitate the responsible use of AI. The first Delphi round followed an open, exploratory approach, while the second sought to prioritise and rank key findings from the initial phase. Qualitative thematic analysis and statistical methods were applied to evaluate responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to the expert panel, AI could be highly beneficial, particularly for risk communication (eg, tailoring messages) and infodemic management (eg, social listening), while its utility for fostering community engagement was viewed more critically. Challenges and risks affect all three components of RCCE-IM equally, with algorithmic bias and privacy breaches being of particular concern. Panellists anticipated both optimistic (eg, democratisation of information) and pessimistic (eg, erosion of public trust) future scenarios. They identified seven principles for the responsible use of AI for public health practices, with equity and transparency being the most important. Prioritised actions ranged from regulatory measures, resource allocation and feedback loops to capacity building, public trust initiatives and educational training.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To responsibly navigate the multifaceted opportunities, challenges and risks of AI for RCCE-IM in public health emergencies, clear guiding principles, ongoing critical evaluation and training as well as societal collaboration across countries are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"10 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12104889/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Responsible artificial intelligence in public health: a Delphi study on risk communication, community engagement and infodemic management.\",\"authors\":\"Daniela Mahl, Mike S Schäfer, Stefan Adrian Voinea, Keyrellous Adib, Ben Duncan, Cristiana Salvi, David Novillo-Ortiz\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018545\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) holds the potential to fundamentally transform how public health authorities use risk communication, community engagement and infodemic management (RCCE-IM) to prepare for, manage and mitigate public health emergencies. As research on this crucial transformation remains limited, we conducted a modified Delphi study on the impact of AI on RCCE-IM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In two successive surveys, 54 experts-scholars with expertise in public health, digital health, health communication, risk communication and AI, as well as RCCE-IM professionals-from 27 countries assessed opportunities, challenges and risks of AI, anticipated future scenarios, and identified principles and actions to facilitate the responsible use of AI. The first Delphi round followed an open, exploratory approach, while the second sought to prioritise and rank key findings from the initial phase. Qualitative thematic analysis and statistical methods were applied to evaluate responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to the expert panel, AI could be highly beneficial, particularly for risk communication (eg, tailoring messages) and infodemic management (eg, social listening), while its utility for fostering community engagement was viewed more critically. Challenges and risks affect all three components of RCCE-IM equally, with algorithmic bias and privacy breaches being of particular concern. Panellists anticipated both optimistic (eg, democratisation of information) and pessimistic (eg, erosion of public trust) future scenarios. They identified seven principles for the responsible use of AI for public health practices, with equity and transparency being the most important. Prioritised actions ranged from regulatory measures, resource allocation and feedback loops to capacity building, public trust initiatives and educational training.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To responsibly navigate the multifaceted opportunities, challenges and risks of AI for RCCE-IM in public health emergencies, clear guiding principles, ongoing critical evaluation and training as well as societal collaboration across countries are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"volume\":\"10 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12104889/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Global Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018545\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2024-018545","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Responsible artificial intelligence in public health: a Delphi study on risk communication, community engagement and infodemic management.
Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) holds the potential to fundamentally transform how public health authorities use risk communication, community engagement and infodemic management (RCCE-IM) to prepare for, manage and mitigate public health emergencies. As research on this crucial transformation remains limited, we conducted a modified Delphi study on the impact of AI on RCCE-IM.
Methods: In two successive surveys, 54 experts-scholars with expertise in public health, digital health, health communication, risk communication and AI, as well as RCCE-IM professionals-from 27 countries assessed opportunities, challenges and risks of AI, anticipated future scenarios, and identified principles and actions to facilitate the responsible use of AI. The first Delphi round followed an open, exploratory approach, while the second sought to prioritise and rank key findings from the initial phase. Qualitative thematic analysis and statistical methods were applied to evaluate responses.
Results: According to the expert panel, AI could be highly beneficial, particularly for risk communication (eg, tailoring messages) and infodemic management (eg, social listening), while its utility for fostering community engagement was viewed more critically. Challenges and risks affect all three components of RCCE-IM equally, with algorithmic bias and privacy breaches being of particular concern. Panellists anticipated both optimistic (eg, democratisation of information) and pessimistic (eg, erosion of public trust) future scenarios. They identified seven principles for the responsible use of AI for public health practices, with equity and transparency being the most important. Prioritised actions ranged from regulatory measures, resource allocation and feedback loops to capacity building, public trust initiatives and educational training.
Conclusion: To responsibly navigate the multifaceted opportunities, challenges and risks of AI for RCCE-IM in public health emergencies, clear guiding principles, ongoing critical evaluation and training as well as societal collaboration across countries are needed.
期刊介绍:
BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.