Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Who should do as AI say? Only non-task expert physicians benefit from correct explainable AI advice
3
Zitationen
13
Autoren
2022
Jahr
Abstract
<title>Abstract</title> Artificial intelligence (AI)-generated clinical advice is becoming more prevalent in healthcare. However, the impact of AI-generated advice on physicians’ decision-making is underexplored. In this study, physicians received X-rays with correct diagnostic advice and were asked to make a diagnosis, rate the advice’s quality, and judge their own confidence. We manipulated whether the advice came with or without a visual annotation on the X-rays and whether it was labeled as coming from an AI or a human radiologist. Overall, receiving annotated advice from an AI resulted in the highest diagnostic accuracy. Physicians rated the quality of AI advice higher than human advice. Neither manipulation had strong effects on participants’ confidence. Importantly, the results varied among task experts and non-task experts, with only the latter considerably benefiting from correct explainable AI advice. These findings raise important considerations for the deployment of diagnostic advice in healthcare.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.200 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.051 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.416 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.776 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.410 Zit.