Medical Expectations Survey on Artificial Intelligence Solutions in daily practice
Giavina-Bianchi, M.; Amaro, E.; Machado, B.
Show abstract
BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) applied to Medicine has become one of the hottest topics for the past years. Although scarcely used in real practice, it brings along many expectations, doubts and fears for physicians. Surveys can help to understand this situation. ObjectiveTo explore the degree of knowledge, expectations, fears and daily practice questions on AI use by physicians. Methodsan electronic survey was sent to physicians of a large hospital in Brazil, from August-September 2022. Results171 physicians responded to our survey. 54% considered themselves to have an intermediate knowledge of AI. 79% believe AI should be regulated by a Governmental Agency. If AI were reliable and available, 78% intend to use AI frequently/always for diagnosis (87%) and/or management (83%), but they were unsure about the use of AI by other health professionals (50%) or by the patients (51%). The main benefit would be increasing the speed for diagnosis and management (64%), and the worst issue, to over rely on AI and lose medical skills (71%). Physicians believe AI would be useful (94%), facilitate the work (87%), increase the number of appointments (54%), not interfere in the financial gain (58%) and not replace their jobs, but, rather, be utilized as an additional source of information (65%). In case of disagreement between AI and physicians, most answered that a third opinion should be requested (86%). There were no significant differences between the physicians answers according to time since graduation. Conclusionsphysicians showed to have good expectations regarding the use of AI in Medicine when applied by themselves, but not so much by others. They also have intention to use it, as long as it was approved by a Regulatory Agency. Although there was hope for the beneficial impact of AI on healthcare, it also brings specific concerns.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- REPLICCAR II Study: Data Quality Audit in the Paulista Cardiovascular Surgery Registry 94%
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice related to the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Indonesia: a nationwide cross-sectional study 94%
- Protocol: Waiting time and ways of accessing specialized health services in public hospitals in Ecuador 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Large language models for generating medical examinations: systematic review 97%
- Medical students' perceptions towards artificial intelligence in education and practice: A multinational, multicenter cross-sectional study 97%
- Performance of ChatGPT on Chinese National Medical Licensing Examinations: A Five-Year Examination Evaluation Study for Physicians, Pharmacists and Nurses 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Measures of socioeconomic advantage are not independent predictors of support for healthcare AI: subgroup analysis of a national Australian survey 95%
- Development of a customised data management system for a COVID-19-adapted colorectal cancer pathway 93%
- Connecting Artificial Intelligence and Primary Care Challenges: Findings from a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative Consultation 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Choice of Intraoperative Ultrasound adjuncts for Brain Tumor Surgery 94%
- On the predictability of postoperative complications for cancer patients: a Portuguese cohort study 93%
- Construction and application of a revised satisfaction index model for Chinese urban and rural residents basic medical insurance 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.