Artificial intelligence and health equity in primary care: A qualitative study with key stakeholders
d'Elia, A.; Gabbay, M.; Frith, L.; Rodgers, S.; Kierans, C.
Show abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI)-augmented interventions are currently being rolled out across primary care, but how it affects health equity remains insufficiently understood. This qualitative study addresses this gap through an ethnographical inquiry based on 32 interviews and focus groups with stakeholders including commissioners, decision makers, AI developers, researchers, GPs and patient groups involved in the implementation of AI in English primary care. We took a sociotechnical perspective in order to assess how the stakeholders can improve health equity through the implementation process of AI within the wider system. We found that regulation and policy alone cannot guarantee equitable implementation of AI but can provide a framework to enable other stakeholders to take measures to promote equity: fostering a shared understanding of the causal mechanisms of AI and health equity, how to measure health equity, and how to share data necessary for equity promotion. Further, all stakeholders need to be on board for equitable implementation, and currently innovation leaves clinicians and patients behind. Capacity building is needed to achieve this, in particular at local commissioning and clinician level. Careful implementation and pragmatically focused research are needed to make AI in primary care capable of advancing health equity.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Adverse event reviews in healthcare: What matters to patients and their family? A qualitative study exploring the perspective of patients and family 95%
- Ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes among healthcare workers in the United Kingdom: UK-REACH ethico-legal research, qualitative research on healthcare workers’ experiences, and stakeholder engagement protocol 95%
- Implementation Science Protocol for a participatory, theory-informed implementation research programme in the context of health system strengthening in sub-Saharan Africa (ASSET-ImplementER) 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Implementation of predictive risk stratification to reduce emergency admissions to hospital: experiences of general practitioners and practice managers 95%
- Impact of COVID-19 on Migrants’ Access to Primary Care: A National Qualitative Study 95%
- Changes in General Practice use and costs with COVID-19 and telehealth initiatives 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Wellbeing Impact Study of High-Speed 2 (WISH2): Protocol for a mixed-methods examination of the impact of major transport infrastructure development on mental health and wellbeing 96%
- Knowledge mobilisation of rapid evidence reviews to inform health and social care policy and practice in a public health emergency: appraisal of the Wales COVID-19 Evidence Centre processes and impact, 2021-23 96%
- “The impact of the Little Orange Book on how parents/carers manage symptoms of illness in children: A mixed methods study” 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Trauma informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs 95%
- “I don’t know what to do or where to go”. Experiences of accessing healthcare support from the perspectives of people living with Long Covid and healthcare professionals: A qualitative study in Bradford, UK 95%
- Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK 94%
"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.