Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Clinicians’ Perceptions of an Artificial Intelligence–Based Blood Utilization Calculator: Qualitative Exploratory Study
23
Zitationen
3
Autoren
2022
Jahr
Abstract
This study highlights that analytical efficacy alone does not ensure technology use or acceptance. The overall system's design, user perception, and users' knowledge of the technology are equally important and necessary (limitations, functionality, purpose, and scope). Therefore, the effective integration of AI-based decision support systems, such as the BUC, mandates multidisciplinary engagement, ensuring the adequate initial and recurrent training of AI users while maintaining high analytical efficacy and validity. As a final takeaway, the design of AI systems that are made to perform specific tasks must be self-explanatory, so that the users can easily understand how and when to use the technology. Using any technology on a population for whom it was not initially designed will hinder user perception and the technology's use.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care
1999 · 5.187 Zit.
Effects of tranexamic acid on death, vascular occlusive events, and blood transfusion in trauma patients with significant haemorrhage (CRASH-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial
2010 · 3.211 Zit.
Transfusion of Plasma, Platelets, and Red Blood Cells in a 1:1:1 vs a 1:1:2 Ratio and Mortality in Patients With Severe Trauma
2015 · 2.394 Zit.
A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care
1999 · 2.044 Zit.
Correction of the Anemia of End-Stage Renal Disease with Recombinant Human Erythropoietin
1987 · 2.019 Zit.