Patient apprehensions about the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Richardson JP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8455556 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Patient apprehensions about the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare.
Richardson Jordan P JP Smith Cambray C Curtis Susan S Watson Sara S Zhu Xuan X Barry Barbara B Sharp Richard R RR
NPJ digital medicine 20210921 1
While there is significant enthusiasm in the medical community about the use of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in healthcare, few research studies have sought to assess patient perspectives on these technologies. We conducted 15 focus groups examining patient views of diverse applications of AI in healthcare. Our results indicate that patients have multiple concerns, including concerns related to the safety of AI, threats to patient choice, potential increases in healthcare costs, dat ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ABSTRACT Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) enables remote patient monitoring (RPM) which reduces costs by triaging patients to optimize hospitalization and avoid complications. The FDA regulates AI in medical devices and aims to ensure patient safety, effectiveness, and transparent AI solutions. Objectives: Identify and summarize FDA approved RPM devices to provide information for the US medical device industry based on previous approvals and the markets’ needs. Methods: We searched publicly available databases on FDA-approved RPM devices. Selection criteria were established to classify a solution as AI. Technical information was analyzed on pre-identified 16 parameters for the qualified solutions. Results: A total of 47 RPM devices were reviewed, among which 12.8% were classified as a De Novo product and the remaining devices fell under the 510(K) FDA category. The cardiovascular (74%) AI RPM solutions dominated the US market, followed by ECG-based arrhythmia detection algorithms (59.4%), and Hemodynamics and Vital Sign monitoring algorithms (21.9%). The trend observed in the FDA rejected devices was their inability to be classified into clinically relevant categories (Criteria 2 and 3). Conclusion: The market needs more innovative RPM solutions under the De Novo category, as there are very few. The transparency is low on the technical aspect of AI algorithms. The market needs AI algorithms that can effectively classify patients rather than merely improve device functionality.
| S-EPMC10158563 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDigital Health Technologies (DHTs) are currently being funneled through legacy regulatory processes that are not adapted to the unique particularities of this new technology class. In the absence of adequate regulation of DHTs, the briefing of a patient by their healthcare provider (HCP) as a component of informed consent can present the last line of defense before potentially harmful technologies are employed on a patient.MethodsThis exploratory study utilizes a case vignette of a machine learning-based technology for the diagnosis of ischemic heart disease that is presented to a group of medical students, physicians, and bioethicists. What constitutes the necessary standard and content of the HCP-patient briefings is explored using a survey (N = 34). Whether participants actually provide a sufficient HCP-patient briefing is evaluated based on audio recordings.Results and conclusionsWe find that participants deem artificial intelligence use in medical context should be declared to patients and argue that the explanation should currently follow the standard required of other experimental procedures. Further, since our study provides indications that implementation of HCP-patient briefings lacks behind the identified standard, opportunities for incorporation of training on the use of DHTs into medical curricula and continuous training schedules should be considered.
| S-EPMC9806394 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8521861 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to evaluate women's attitudes towards artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies used in mental health care. We conducted a cross-sectional, online survey of U.S. adults reporting female sex at birth focused on bioethical considerations for AI-based technologies in mental healthcare, stratifying by previous pregnancy. Survey respondents (n = 258) were open to AI-based technologies in mental healthcare but concerned about medical harm and inappropriate data sharing. They held clinicians, developers, healthcare systems, and the government responsible for harm. Most reported it was "very important" for them to understand AI output. More previously pregnant respondents reported being told AI played a small role in mental healthcare was "very important" versus those not previously pregnant (P = .03). We conclude that protections against harm, transparency around data use, preservation of the patient-clinician relationship, and patient comprehension of AI predictions may facilitate trust in AI-based technologies for mental healthcare among women.
| S-EPMC10329494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) integration in healthcare has emerged as a transformative force, promising to enhance medical diagnosis, treatment, and overall healthcare delivery. Hence, this study investigates university students' perceptions of using AI in healthcare. A cross-sectional survey was conducted at two major universities using a paper-based questionnaire from September 2023 to November 2023. Participants' views regarding using artificial intelligence in healthcare were investigated using 25 items distributed across five domains. The Mann-Whitney U test was applied to compare variables. Two hundred seventy-nine (279) students completed the questionnaire. More than half of the participants (52%, n = 145) expressed their belief in AI's potential to reduce treatment errors. However, about (61.6%, n = 172) of participants fear the influence of AI that could prevent doctors from learning to make correct patient care judgments, and it was widely agreed (69%) that doctors should ultimately maintain final control over patient care. Participants with experience with AI, such as engaging with AI chatbots, significantly reported higher scores in both the "Benefits and Positivity Toward AI in Healthcare" and "Concerns and Fears" domains (p = 0.024) and (p = 0.026), respectively. The identified cautious optimism, concerns, and fears highlight the delicate balance required for successful AI integration. The findings emphasize the importance of addressing specific concerns, promoting positive experiences with AI, and establishing transparent communication channels. Insights from such research can guide the development of ethical frameworks, policies, and targeted interventions, fostering a harmonious integration of AI into the healthcare landscape in developing countries.
| S-EPMC11569219 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn an effort to improve the quality of medical care, the philosophy of patient-centered care has become integrated into almost every aspect of the medical community. Despite its widespread acceptance, among patients and practitioners, there are concerns that rapid advancements in artificial intelligence may threaten elements of patient-centered care, such as personal relationships with care providers and patient-driven choices. This study explores the extent to which patients are confident in and comfortable with the use of these technologies when it comes to their own individual care and identifies areas that may align with or threaten elements of patient-centered care.MethodsAn exploratory, mixed-method approach was used to analyze survey data from 600 US-based adults in the State of Florida. The survey was administered through a leading market research provider (August 10-21, 2023), and responses were collected to be representative of the state's population based on age, gender, race/ethnicity, and political affiliation.ResultsRespondents were more comfortable with the use of AI in health-related tasks that were not associated with doctor-patient relationships, such as scheduling patient appointments or follow-ups (84.2%). Fear of losing the 'human touch' associated with doctors was a common theme within qualitative coding, suggesting a potential conflict between the implementation of AI and patient-centered care. In addition, decision self-efficacy was associated with higher levels of comfort with AI, but there were also concerns about losing decision-making control, workforce changes, and cost concerns. A small majority of participants mentioned that AI could be useful for doctors and lead to more equitable care but only when used within limits.ConclusionThe application of AI in medical care is rapidly advancing, but oversight, regulation, and guidance addressing critical aspects of patient-centered care are lacking. While there is no evidence that AI will undermine patient-physician relationships at this time, there is concern on the part of patients regarding the application of AI within medical care and specifically as it relates to their interaction with physicians. Medical guidance on incorporating AI while adhering to the principles of patient-centered care is needed to clarify how AI will augment medical care.
| S-EPMC11193174 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Billions of dollars are being invested into developing medical artificial intelligence (AI) systems and yet public opinion of AI in the medical field seems to be mixed. Although high expectations for the future of medical AI do exist in the American public, anxiety and uncertainty about what it can do and how it works is widespread. Continuing evaluation of public opinion on AI in healthcare is necessary to ensure alignment between patient attitudes and the technologies adopted. We conducted a representative-sample survey (total N = 203) to measure the trust of the American public towards medical AI. Primarily, we contrasted preferences for AI and human professionals to be medical decision-makers. Additionally, we measured expectations for the impact and use of medical AI in the future. We present four noteworthy results: (1) The general public strongly prefers human medical professionals make medical decisions, while at the same time believing they are more likely to make culturally biased decisions than AI. (2) The general public is more comfortable with a human reading their medical records than an AI, both now and "100 years from now." (3) The general public is nearly evenly split between those who would trust their own doctor to use AI and those who would not. (4) Respondents expect AI will improve medical treatment but more so in the distant future than immediately.
| S-EPMC10635466 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare has demonstrated high efficiency in academic research, while only few, and predominantly small, real-world AI applications exist in the preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic contexts. Our identification and analysis of success factors for the implementation of AI aims to close the gap between recent years' significant academic AI advancements and the comparably low level of practical application in healthcare. Methods: A literature and real life cases analysis was conducted in Scopus and OpacPlus as well as the Google advanced search database. The according search queries have been defined based on success factor categories for AI implementation derived from a prior World Health Organization survey about barriers of adoption of Big Data within 125 countries. The eligible publications and real life cases were identified through a catalog of in- and exclusion criteria focused on concrete AI application cases. These were then analyzed to deduct and discuss success factors that facilitate or inhibit a broad-scale implementation of AI in healthcare. Results: The analysis revealed three categories of success factors, namely (1) policy setting, (2) technological implementation, and (3) medical and economic impact measurement. For each of them a set of recommendations has been deducted: First, a risk adjusted policy frame is required that distinguishes between precautionary and permissionless principles, and differentiates among accountability, liability, and culpability. Second, a "privacy by design" centered technology infrastructure shall be applied that enables practical and legally compliant data access. Third, the medical and economic impact need to be quantified, e.g., through the measurement of quality-adjusted life years while applying the CHEERS and PRISMA reporting criteria. Conclusions: Private and public institutions can already today leverage AI implementation based on the identified results and thus drive the translation from scientific development to real world application. Additional success factors could include trust-building measures, data categorization guidelines, and risk level assessments and as the success factors are interlinked, future research should elaborate on their optimal interaction to utilize the full potential of AI in real world application.
| S-EPMC8521923 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Artificial intelligence (AI) systems hold great promise to improve healthcare over the next decades. Specifically, AI systems leveraging multiple data sources and input modalities are poised to become a viable method to deliver more accurate results and deployable pipelines across a wide range of applications. In this work, we propose and evaluate a unified Holistic AI in Medicine (HAIM) framework to facilitate the generation and testing of AI systems that leverage multimodal inputs. Our approach uses generalizable data pre-processing and machine learning modeling stages that can be readily adapted for research and deployment in healthcare environments. We evaluate our HAIM framework by training and characterizing 14,324 independent models based on HAIM-MIMIC-MM, a multimodal clinical database (N = 34,537 samples) containing 7279 unique hospitalizations and 6485 patients, spanning all possible input combinations of 4 data modalities (i.e., tabular, time-series, text, and images), 11 unique data sources and 12 predictive tasks. We show that this framework can consistently and robustly produce models that outperform similar single-source approaches across various healthcare demonstrations (by 6-33%), including 10 distinct chest pathology diagnoses, along with length-of-stay and 48 h mortality predictions. We also quantify the contribution of each modality and data source using Shapley values, which demonstrates the heterogeneity in data modality importance and the necessity of multimodal inputs across different healthcare-relevant tasks. The generalizable properties and flexibility of our Holistic AI in Medicine (HAIM) framework could offer a promising pathway for future multimodal predictive systems in clinical and operational healthcare settings.
| S-EPMC9489871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare-associated infections are infections that patients acquire during hospitalization or while receiving healthcare in other facilities. They represent the most frequent negative outcome in healthcare, can be entirely prevented, and pose a burden in terms of financial and human costs. With the development of new AI and ML algorithms, hospitals could develop new and automated surveillance and prevention models for HAIs, leading to improved patient safety. The aim of this review is to systematically retrieve, collect, and summarize all available information on the application and impact of AI in HAI surveillance and/or prevention.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature using PubMed and Scopus to find articles related to the implementation of artificial intelligence in the surveillance and/or prevention of HAIs.ResultsWe identified a total of 218 articles, of which only 35 were included in the review. Most studies were conducted in the US (n = 10, 28.6%) and China (n = 5; 14.3%) and were published between 2021 and 2023 (26 articles, 74.3%) with an increasing trend over time. Most focused on the development of ML algorithms for the identification/prevention of surgical site infections (n = 18; 51%), followed by HAIs in general (n = 9; 26%), hospital-acquired urinary tract infections (n = 5; 9%), and healthcare-associated pneumonia (n = 3; 9%). Only one study focused on the proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and included healthcare workers as the study population. Overall, the trend indicates that several AI/ML models can effectively assist clinicians in everyday decisions, by identifying HAIs early or preventing them through personalized risk factors with good performance. However, only a few studies have reported an actual implementation of these models, which proved highly successful. In one case, manual workload was reduced by nearly 85%, while another study observed a decrease in the local hospital's HAI incidence from 1.31% to 0.58%.ConclusionsAI has significant potential to improve the prevention, diagnosis, and management of healthcare-associated infections, offering benefits such as increased accuracy, reduced workloads, and cost savings. Although some AI applications have already been tested and validated, adoption in healthcare is hindered by barriers such as high implementation costs, technological limitations, and resistance from healthcare workers. Overcoming these challenges could allow AI to be more widely and cost-effectively integrated, ultimately improving patient care and infection management.
| S-EPMC11477207 | biostudies-literature