Project description:BackgroundHealthcare is expected to increasingly integrate technologies enabled by artificial intelligence (AI) into patient care. Understanding perceptions of these tools is essential to successful development and adoption. This exploratory study gauged participants' level of openness, concern, and perceived benefit associated with AI-driven healthcare technologies. We also explored socio-demographic, health-related, and psychosocial correlates of these perceptions.MethodsWe developed a measure depicting six AI-driven technologies that either diagnose, predict, or suggest treatment. We administered the measure via an online survey to adults (N = 936) in the United States using MTurk, a crowdsourcing platform. Participants indicated their level of openness to using the AI technology in the healthcare scenario. Items reflecting potential concerns and benefits associated with each technology accompanied the scenarios. Participants rated the extent that the statements of concerns and benefits influenced their perception of favorability toward the technology. Participants completed measures of socio-demographics, health variables, and psychosocial variables such as trust in the healthcare system and trust in technology. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the concern and benefit items identified two factors representing overall level of concern and perceived benefit. Descriptive analyses examined levels of openness, concern, and perceived benefit. Correlational analyses explored associations of socio-demographic, health, and psychosocial variables with openness, concern, and benefit scores while multivariable regression models examined these relationships concurrently.ResultsParticipants were moderately open to AI-driven healthcare technologies (M = 3.1/5.0 ± 0.9), but there was variation depending on the type of application, and the statements of concerns and benefits swayed views. Trust in the healthcare system and trust in technology were the strongest, most consistent correlates of openness, concern, and perceived benefit. Most other socio-demographic, health-related, and psychosocial variables were less strongly, or not, associated, but multivariable models indicated some personality characteristics (e.g., conscientiousness and agreeableness) and socio-demographics (e.g., full-time employment, age, sex, and race) were modestly related to perceptions.ConclusionsParticipants' openness appears tenuous, suggesting early promotion strategies and experiences with novel AI technologies may strongly influence views, especially if implementation of AI technologies increases or undermines trust. The exploratory nature of these findings warrants additional research.

Project description:Objectives: The medical community is in agreement that artificial intelligence (AI) will have a radical impact on patient care in the near future. The purpose of this study is to assess the awareness of AI technologies among health professionals and to investigate their perceptions toward AI applications in medicine. Design: A web-based Google Forms survey was distributed via the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust e-newsletter. Setting: Only staff working at the NHS Foundation Trust received an invitation to complete the online questionnaire. Participants: 98 healthcare professionals out of 7,538 (response rate 1.3%; CI 95%; margin of error 9.64%) completed the survey, including medical doctors, nurses, therapists, managers, and others. Primary outcome: To investigate the prior knowledge of health professionals on the subject of AI as well as their attitudes and worries about its current and future applications. Results: 64% of respondents reported never coming across applications of AI in their work and 87% did not know the difference between machine learning and deep learning, although 50% knew at least one of the two terms. Furthermore, only 5% stated using speech recognition or transcription applications on a daily basis, while 63% never utilize them. 80% of participants believed there may be serious privacy issues associated with the use of AI and 40% considered AI to be potentially even more dangerous than nuclear weapons. However, 79% also believed AI could be useful or extremely useful in their field of work and only 10% were worried AI will replace them at their job. Conclusions: Despite agreeing on the usefulness of AI in the medical field, most health professionals lack a full understanding of the principles of AI and are worried about potential consequences of its widespread use in clinical practice. The cooperation of healthcare workers is crucial for the integration of AI into clinical practice and without it the NHS may miss out on an exceptionally rewarding opportunity. This highlights the need for better education and clear regulatory frameworks.

Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are rapidly advancing fields with increasing utility in health care. We conducted a survey to determine the perceptions of Canadian vascular surgeons toward AI/ML.MethodsAn online questionnaire was distributed to 162 members of the Canadian Society for Vascular Surgery. Self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions with respect to potential applications, limitations, and facilitators of AI/ML were assessed.ResultsOverall, 50 of the 162 Canadian vascular surgeons (31%) responded to the survey. Most respondents were aged 30 to 59 years (72%), male (80%), and White (67%) and practiced in academic settings (72%). One half of the participants reported that their knowledge of AI/ML was poor or very poor. Most were excited or very excited about AI/ML (66%) and were interested or very interested in learning more about the field (83.7%). The respondents believed that AI/ML would be useful or very useful for diagnosis (62%), prognosis (72%), patient selection (56%), image analysis (64%), intraoperative guidance (52%), research (88%), and education (80%). The limitations that the participants were most concerned about were errors leading to patient harm (42%), bias based on patient demographics (42%), and lack of clinician knowledge and skills in AI/ML (40%). Most were not concerned or were mildly concerned about job replacement (86%). The factors that were most important to encouraging clinicians to use AI/ML models were improvements in efficiency (88%), accurate predictions (84%), and ease of use (84%). The comments from respondents focused on the pressing need for the implementation of AI/ML in vascular surgery owing to the potential to improve care delivery.ConclusionsCanadian vascular surgeons have positive views on AI/ML and believe this technology can be applied to multiple aspects of the specialty to improve patient care, research, and education. Current self-reported knowledge is poor, although interest was expressed in learning more about the field. The facilitators and barriers to the effective use of AI/ML identified in the present study can guide future development of these tools in vascular surgery.

Project description:Introduction: As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into various professional fields, understanding its impact on pharmacy education is crucial. This study explores pharmacists' perceptions of AI's role in enhancing educational and professional practices, particularly focusing on the generation of educational content and analytical tasks. Objectives: The primary objective was to assess pharmacists' concerns and perceived benefits regarding the use of AI in pharmacy education, examining variations across different age groups and years of practice. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was completed by 446 pharmacists who actively precept pharmacy residents and students. Respondents practiced across 35 states with over half (53.4%) being in Ohio. The survey included items on concerns about AI's quality and accuracy, human interaction, plagiarism, and its potential benefits in data analysis and research literature summarization. Responses were analyzed to identify trends across demographic categories, including age and years in practice. Results: Of the respondents, 67.9% expressed concerns about the quality and accuracy of AI-generated content, while 50.9% were concerned about plagiarism. Younger pharmacists (73.8% of those aged 20-29) showed heightened concern about accuracy compared to older groups (56.8% of those aged 60+). In contrast, 57.8% of respondents recognized AI's potential benefits for data analysis, with experienced pharmacists (>20 years in practice) being more likely to see these advantages (62.2%). Conclusion: The findings indicate a need for targeted educational strategies to address AI literacy and ethical use in pharmacy education. Integrating AI tools that support educational objectives while addressing these concerns could enhance the efficacy and acceptance of AI in pharmacy practice. Further research should explore the development of training programs that align with the evolving expectations and technological competencies of different pharmacist demographics.

Project description:ObjectivesMedical artificial intelligence (AI) has been used widely applied in clinical field due to its convenience and innovation. However, several policy and regulatory issues such as credibility, sharing of responsibility and ethics have raised concerns in the use of AI. It is therefore necessary to understand the general public's views on medical AI. Here, a meta-synthesis was conducted to analyse and summarise the public's understanding of the application of AI in the healthcare field, to provide recommendations for future use and management of AI in medical practice.DesignThis was a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.MethodA search was performed on the following databases to identify studies published in English and Chinese: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of science, Cochrane library, Embase, PsycINFO, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP. The search was conducted from database inception to 25 December 2021. The meta-aggregation approach of JBI was used to summarise findings from qualitative studies, focusing on the public's perception of the application of AI in healthcare.ResultsOf the 5128 studies screened, 12 met the inclusion criteria, hence were incorporated into analysis. Three synthesised findings were used as the basis of our conclusions, including advantages of medical AI from the public's perspective, ethical and legal concerns about medical AI from the public's perspective, and public suggestions on the application of AI in medical field.ConclusionResults showed that the public acknowledges the unique advantages and convenience of medical AI. Meanwhile, several concerns about the application of medical AI were observed, most of which involve ethical and legal issues. The standard application and reasonable supervision of medical AI is key to ensuring its effective utilisation. Based on the public's perspective, this analysis provides insights and suggestions for health managers on how to implement and apply medical AI smoothly, while ensuring safety in healthcare practice.Prospero registration numberCRD42022315033.

Dataset Information

Exploring the matrix: knowledge, perceptions and prospects of artificial intelligence and machine learning in Nigerian healthcare

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets