Clinician Discourse on Ambient AI Scribes: A Reddit-based Topic Modelling and Sentiment Analysis
Shankar, R.; Xu, Q.
Show abstract
BackgroundAmbient AI scribes are rapidly entering clinical workflows, yet end-user perspectives remain underrepresented in the peer-reviewed literature. Online clinician communities offer an unfiltered window into adoption barriers, perceived benefits, and product-level concerns. ObjectiveTo characterise themes and sentiment in clinician discourse on ambient AI scribes across professional Reddit communities. MethodsWe scraped posts from ten clinically oriented subreddits using twelve AI scribe related queries via the public Reddit JSON API. A two-tier keyword filter retained posts mentioning at least one AI scribe term and one clinical or workflow term. Texts were embedded with all-MiniLM-L6-v2, reduced via UMAP, clustered with HDBSCAN, and labelled using BERTopic with c-TF-IDF keyword extraction. Noise topics matching predefined off-topic patterns (for example, residency match, finance) were removed. Themes were assigned concise labels via Claude Sonnet 4. Sentiment was classified per post using cardiffnlp/twitter-roberta-base-sentiment-latest. ResultsAfter filtering, 176 unique relevant posts from seven active subreddits were retained, with r/FamilyMedicine (n = 64) and r/healthIT (n = 34) dominating. BERTopic produced 12 coherent themes spanning workflow integration, vendor comparison (DAX, Heidi, Freed, Abridge), HIPAA and privacy, mobile and device use, templates and formatting, and research versus clinical use. Overall sentiment was 61.4% neutral, 21.6% positive, and 17.0% negative. The most net-positive theme was DAX/Nuance/AI tools (about 55% positive); the most net-negative were charting fatigue and the freed-AI-scribes discussion thread (about 37 to 40% negative). Engagement (median upvotes and comments) was highest for tool-comparison and pricing themes, indicating salience of practical adoption questions. ConclusionsClinician sentiment toward ambient AI scribes is cautiously favourable but dominated by neutral, problem-solving discourse. Vendor selection, cost, HIPAA compliance, and EHR integration are the most actively debated issues. These insights can inform implementation strategy, vendor benchmarking, and policy guidance for ambient documentation tools.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review 94%
- Benefits and Challenges of Using Virtual Primary Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: From Key Lessons to a Framework for Implementation 93%
- Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Understanding how the design and implementation of Online Consultations influence primary care outcomes: Systematic review of evidence with recommendations for designers, providers, and researchers 95%
- Improving Patient Engagement in Phase 2 Clinical Trials with a Trial-specific Patient Decision Aid (tPDA): A Development and Usability Study 94%
- Tracking private WhatsApp discourse about COVID-19: A longitudinal infodemiology study in Singapore 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Connecting Artificial Intelligence and Primary Care Challenges: Findings from a Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative Consultation 95%
- Cracking the Code: A Scoping Review to Unite Disciplines in Tackling Legal Issues in Health Artificial Intelligence 92%
- Measures of socioeconomic advantage are not independent predictors of support for healthcare AI: subgroup analysis of a national Australian survey 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Validating a Clinical Decision Support System for Palliative Care using healthcare professionals’ insights 94%
- The experiences of 33 national COVID-19 dashboard teams during the first year of the pandemic in the WHO European Region: a qualitative study 93%
- A digital self-care intervention for Ugandan patients with heart failure and their clinicians: User-centred design and usability study 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.