Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Perception and concerns of the hematology and oncology (HemOnc) workforce about artificial intelligence (AI) in clinical practice (CliPr) and medical education (MedED).
1
Zitationen
7
Autoren
2025
Jahr
Abstract
9002 Background: The field of AI is rapidly evolving. With recent development of more user-friendly AI software, its integration into healthcare across different medical specialties, including HemOnc has emerged. Data detailing the perception and concerns of the HemOnc workforce about AI’s roles is lacking and is needed if AI is to be integrated in HemOnc CliPr and MedEd. Methods: Questionnaires about the perception and concerns regarding AI in CliPr and MedEd were created on REDCap and approved by IRB. We surveyed the entire HemOnc workforce at the 3 Mayo Clinic major sites between 11/07/24 and 01/20/25, including physicians, both faculty (FAC) and fellows (FEL), advanced practice providers (APP), and nurses (RN). Participation was voluntary. Simple statistical analyses were employed for the results. Results: 344 participants (PTP) responded to the survey, 118 physicians (41 FEL and 77 FAC), 49 APP, and 177 RN. 64% of PTP report having used AI but only 31% used it in HemOnc MedEd, and 28% in HemOnc CliPr, with 67% considering themselves to have little to no knowledge about AI. 94% of PTP believe AI will be integrated in HemOnc MedEd, with such integration being seen as beneficial by 90%. Among physicians, 85% of FEL and 92% of FAC report that fellowship programs should incorporate AI training into curricula. 95% of PTP believe AI will be incorporated into HemOnc CliPr. Meanwhile, 62% of PTP (50.8% of physicians, and 68% of APP and RN) are concerned about risks it may pose to CliPr. Nevertheless, 90% of PTP would embrace AI’s use in HemOnc. Table 1 details the perceptions and concerns about AI in HemOnc MedEd and CliPr. The main perceived risks are decreased time spent with patients (pts), and inaccuracies or worse pt care. Meanwhile, 33% believe AI would increase efficiency and quality of care, while 30% believe it would increase time spent with pts. 14% of PTP worry their role could be replaced by AI. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest assessment of HemOnc workforce’s perception and concerns about AI. Based on our survey, the HemOnc workforce, in general, endorses AI use, but with some concerns raised. While incorporation in MedEd is perceived with excitement, many envision the use in CliPr involves risks and challenges. Proper systematic education of the workforce about AI, with well-designed CliPr integration methods are needed to mitigate the legitimate existing concerns. Perceptions & concerns about AI in HemOnc MedEd & CliPr. FEL % APP % RN % FAC % AI will assist documentation in CliPr 98 82 79 92 AI will be used in pt communication 73 80 78 87 AI will screen pts for clinical trial enrollment 85 86 76 96 AI will increase the efficiency and quality of CliPr 43 37 24 46 AI will increase time spent with pts 39 27 25 38 AI will decrease time spent with pts 29 41 48 23 AI will lead to inaccuracies or worse CliPr 12 20 25 20 AI may replace the HemOnc workforce 11 16 19 5
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI
2019 · 8.460 Zit.
Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead
2019 · 8.341 Zit.
High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence
2018 · 7.791 Zit.
Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
2005 · 5.781 Zit.
Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
2018 · 5.536 Zit.