皮肤科患者对人工智能和远程医疗的看法:叙述综述。

Q3 Medicine
JMIR dermatology Pub Date : 2025-09-16 DOI:10.2196/75454
Charlotte McRae, Ting Dan Zhang, Leslie Donoghue Seeley, Michael Anderson, Laci Turner, Lauren V Graham
{"title":"皮肤科患者对人工智能和远程医疗的看法:叙述综述。","authors":"Charlotte McRae, Ting Dan Zhang, Leslie Donoghue Seeley, Michael Anderson, Laci Turner, Lauren V Graham","doi":"10.2196/75454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) and telemedicine have significant potential to transform dermatology care delivery, but patient perspectives on these technologies have not been systematically compared.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to examine patient perspectives on AI and telemedicine in dermatology to inform implementation strategies as these technologies increasingly converge in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases between August 2024 and October 2024. We identified 48 papers addressing patient perspectives on AI and telemedicine in dermatology, with none directly comparing patients' views of both technologies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Several distinct themes emerged regarding patient perspectives on these technologies: willingness to use, perceived benefits and risks, barriers to implementation, and conditions necessary for successful integration. Findings revealed that patients express hesitancy toward AI-based diagnoses that lack dermatologist involvement, while preferences for teledermatology varied by reason for appointment, age, and previous technology exposure. Patients' motivations for implementing AI are connected to its potential for quicker diagnoses and improved triage efficiency. At the same time, telemedicine addresses logistical challenges such as reduced travel time and improved appointment availability. Both technologies were perceived to improve accessibility and diagnostic efficiency, though patients expressed concerns about AI's limited communication abilities and teledermatology's inability to perform physical examinations. Primary adoption barriers for these modalities included technological limitations and trust concerns, with patients emphasizing the need for dermatologist oversight, transparency, and adequate educational resources for successful integration.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The complementary strengths of AI and teledermatology suggest they could mitigate each other's limitations when integrated-AI potentially enhancing teledermatology's diagnostic accuracy, while teledermatology addresses AI's lack of human connection. By thoroughly examining these perspectives, this review may serve as a guide for the patient-centered integration of technology in the future landscape of accessible dermatologic care.</p>","PeriodicalId":73553,"journal":{"name":"JMIR dermatology","volume":"8 ","pages":"e75454"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12440257/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine in Dermatology: Narrative Review.\",\"authors\":\"Charlotte McRae, Ting Dan Zhang, Leslie Donoghue Seeley, Michael Anderson, Laci Turner, Lauren V Graham\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/75454\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) and telemedicine have significant potential to transform dermatology care delivery, but patient perspectives on these technologies have not been systematically compared.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to examine patient perspectives on AI and telemedicine in dermatology to inform implementation strategies as these technologies increasingly converge in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases between August 2024 and October 2024. We identified 48 papers addressing patient perspectives on AI and telemedicine in dermatology, with none directly comparing patients' views of both technologies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Several distinct themes emerged regarding patient perspectives on these technologies: willingness to use, perceived benefits and risks, barriers to implementation, and conditions necessary for successful integration. Findings revealed that patients express hesitancy toward AI-based diagnoses that lack dermatologist involvement, while preferences for teledermatology varied by reason for appointment, age, and previous technology exposure. Patients' motivations for implementing AI are connected to its potential for quicker diagnoses and improved triage efficiency. At the same time, telemedicine addresses logistical challenges such as reduced travel time and improved appointment availability. Both technologies were perceived to improve accessibility and diagnostic efficiency, though patients expressed concerns about AI's limited communication abilities and teledermatology's inability to perform physical examinations. Primary adoption barriers for these modalities included technological limitations and trust concerns, with patients emphasizing the need for dermatologist oversight, transparency, and adequate educational resources for successful integration.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The complementary strengths of AI and teledermatology suggest they could mitigate each other's limitations when integrated-AI potentially enhancing teledermatology's diagnostic accuracy, while teledermatology addresses AI's lack of human connection. By thoroughly examining these perspectives, this review may serve as a guide for the patient-centered integration of technology in the future landscape of accessible dermatologic care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73553,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR dermatology\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"e75454\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12440257/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/75454\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/75454","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人工智能(AI)和远程医疗具有改变皮肤科护理服务的巨大潜力,但患者对这些技术的看法尚未进行系统比较。目的:本研究旨在研究患者对皮肤病学中人工智能和远程医疗的看法,为这些技术在临床实践中的日益融合提供实施策略。方法:于2024年8月~ 2024年10月,利用PubMed、Scopus和Embase数据库进行综合文献检索。我们确定了48篇关于患者对皮肤病学中人工智能和远程医疗的看法的论文,没有一篇论文直接比较了患者对这两种技术的看法。结果:关于患者对这些技术的看法,出现了几个不同的主题:使用的意愿、可感知的益处和风险、实施的障碍以及成功整合所需的条件。研究结果显示,患者对缺乏皮肤科医生参与的基于人工智能的诊断表现出犹豫,而对远程皮肤科的偏好因预约、年龄和以前的技术接触而异。患者使用人工智能的动机与其更快诊断和提高分诊效率的潜力有关。与此同时,远程医疗解决了后勤方面的挑战,如减少旅行时间和提高预约时间。这两项技术都被认为提高了可及性和诊断效率,尽管患者对人工智能有限的沟通能力和远程皮肤科无法进行身体检查表示担忧。采用这些方法的主要障碍包括技术限制和信任问题,患者强调需要皮肤科医生的监督、透明度和足够的教育资源才能成功整合。结论:人工智能和远程皮肤科的互补优势表明,当集成人工智能可能提高远程皮肤科的诊断准确性时,它们可以缓解彼此的局限性,而远程皮肤科则解决人工智能缺乏人际联系的问题。通过深入研究这些观点,本综述可以作为指导,以患者为中心的整合技术在未来的景观可及的皮肤科护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Patient Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine in Dermatology: Narrative Review.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) and telemedicine have significant potential to transform dermatology care delivery, but patient perspectives on these technologies have not been systematically compared.

Objective: This study aimed to examine patient perspectives on AI and telemedicine in dermatology to inform implementation strategies as these technologies increasingly converge in clinical practice.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases between August 2024 and October 2024. We identified 48 papers addressing patient perspectives on AI and telemedicine in dermatology, with none directly comparing patients' views of both technologies.

Results: Several distinct themes emerged regarding patient perspectives on these technologies: willingness to use, perceived benefits and risks, barriers to implementation, and conditions necessary for successful integration. Findings revealed that patients express hesitancy toward AI-based diagnoses that lack dermatologist involvement, while preferences for teledermatology varied by reason for appointment, age, and previous technology exposure. Patients' motivations for implementing AI are connected to its potential for quicker diagnoses and improved triage efficiency. At the same time, telemedicine addresses logistical challenges such as reduced travel time and improved appointment availability. Both technologies were perceived to improve accessibility and diagnostic efficiency, though patients expressed concerns about AI's limited communication abilities and teledermatology's inability to perform physical examinations. Primary adoption barriers for these modalities included technological limitations and trust concerns, with patients emphasizing the need for dermatologist oversight, transparency, and adequate educational resources for successful integration.

Conclusions: The complementary strengths of AI and teledermatology suggest they could mitigate each other's limitations when integrated-AI potentially enhancing teledermatology's diagnostic accuracy, while teledermatology addresses AI's lack of human connection. By thoroughly examining these perspectives, this review may serve as a guide for the patient-centered integration of technology in the future landscape of accessible dermatologic care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
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