OpenAlex · Aktualisierung stündlich · Letzte Aktualisierung: 02.05.2026, 02:17

Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.

Governance, Accountability and Post-Deployment Monitoring Preferences for AI Integration in West African Clinical Practice: A Mixed-Methods Study

2026·0 Zitationen·medRxivOpen Access
Volltext beim Verlag öffnen

0

Zitationen

11

Autoren

2026

Jahr

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into clinical practice holds transformative potential for healthcare in West Africa, but safe deployment requires context-appropriate governance, accountability, and post-deployment monitoring frameworks. This cross-sectional mixed-methods study examined preferences and concerns of West African clinicians and technical experts regarding AI governance structures, post-deployment surveillance mechanisms, and accountability allocation. Methods A structured questionnaire was administered to 136 physicians affiliated with the West African College of Physicians (February 22-28, 2026), complemented by 72 key informant interviews with technical leads, AI developers, data scientists, policymakers, and healthcare leaders. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, inferential tests, and thematic analysis. Results Clinicians strongly preferred independent regulatory bodies (40.4%) for overseeing AI tool performance, with high trust ratings (mean:4.3/5), while vendor self-monitoring received minimal support (3.7%, mean:2.4/5). Real-time dashboards were the most favored monitoring approach (41.9%). Clear accountability pathways (94.1%), algorithm transparency (91.9%), and real-time performance data (89.7%) were rated essential by majorities. Major concerns included clinicians being unfairly blamed for AI errors (76.5%), excessive vendor control (72.8%), and absence of clear reporting pathways (69.9%). Qualitative findings emphasized continuous performance tracking for accuracy, fairness, and bias; structured incident reporting; protocols for model drift and failure; and multi-layered governance combining independent oversight, institutional AI committees, and explicit liability frameworks. Conclusion This study provides the first empirical evidence from West Africa on clinician preferences for AI governance. Findings offer actionable guidance for policymakers to build trustworthy, equitable, and safe AI integration frameworks that prioritize transparency, independent oversight, and clinician protection.

Ähnliche Arbeiten