Repository logo
  • Log In
    Log in via Symplectic to deposit your publication(s).
Repository logo
  • Communities & Collections
  • Research Outputs
  • Statistics
  • Log In
    Log in via Symplectic to deposit your publication(s).
  1. Home
  2. Faculty of Medicine
  3. School of Public Health
  4. School of Public Health
  5. Attitudes towards trusting artificial intelligence insights and factors to prevent the passive adherence of GPs: a pilot study
 
  • Details
Attitudes towards trusting artificial intelligence insights and factors to prevent the passive adherence of GPs: a pilot study
File(s)
Attitudes towards Trusting Artificial Intelligence Insights and Factors to Prevent the Passive Adherence of GPs A Pilot Stud.pdf (4.13 MB)
Published version
Author(s)
Micocci, Massimo
Borsci, Simone
Thakerar, Viral
Walne, Simon
Manshadi, Yasmine
more
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems could improve system efficiency by supporting clinicians in making appropriate referrals. However, they are imperfect by nature and misdiagnoses, if not correctly identified, can have consequences for patient care. In this paper, findings from an online survey are presented to understand the aptitude of GPs (n = 50) in appropriately trusting or not trusting the output of a fictitious AI-based decision support tool when assessing skin lesions, and to identify which individual characteristics could make GPs less prone to adhere to erroneous diagnostics results. The findings suggest that, when the AI was correct, the GPs’ ability to correctly diagnose a skin lesion significantly improved after receiving correct AI information, from 73.6% to 86.8% (X2 (1, N = 50) = 21.787, p < 0.001), with significant effects for both the benign (X2 (1, N = 50) = 21, p < 0.001) and malignant cases (X2 (1, N = 50) = 4.654, p = 0.031). However, when the AI provided erroneous information, only 10% of the GPs were able to correctly disagree with the indication of the AI in terms of diagnosis (d-AIW M: 0.12, SD: 0.37), and only 14% of participants were able to correctly decide the management plan despite the AI insights (d-AIW M:0.12, SD: 0.32). The analysis of the difference between groups in terms of individual characteristics suggested that GPs with domain knowledge in dermatology were better at rejecting the wrong insights from AI. View Full-Text
Date Issued
2021-07-14
Date Acceptance
2021-07-09
Citation
Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2021, 10 (14), pp.1-11
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/93654
URL
https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/10/14/3101/htm#
DOI
https://www.dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10143101
ISSN
2077-0383
Publisher
MDPI AG
Start Page
1
End Page
11
Journal / Book Title
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Volume
10
Issue
14
Copyright Statement
© 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
License URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Identifier
http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000676241600001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=1ba7043ffcc86c417c072aa74d649202
Subjects
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Medicine, General & Internal
General & Internal Medicine
artificial intelligence
trust
passive adherence
human factors
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
ARTN 3101
Date Publish Online
2021-07-14
About
Spiral Depositing with Spiral Publishing with Spiral Symplectic
Contact us
Open access team Report an issue
Other Services
Scholarly Communications Library Services
logo

Imperial College London

South Kensington Campus

London SW7 2AZ, UK

tel: +44 (0)20 7589 5111

Accessibility Modern slavery statement Cookie Policy

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback