ArticleJournal of medical systems2021
Effect of AI Explanations on Human Perceptions of Patient-Facing AI-Powered Healthcare Systems.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the impact of information on patient attitudes toward artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support (AI/CDS): a pilot web-based SMART vignette study.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Trial
- Patients' and Providers' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Health Record Use in Deep Phenotyping and Rare-Disease Screening: An Empty Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in healthcare: a qualitative study exploring consumer perspectives.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Key Information Influencing Patient Decision-Making About AI in Health Care: Survey Experiment Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Evaluating trustworthiness in AI-Based diabetic retinopathy screening: addressing transparency, consent, and privacy challenges.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Personalized health monitoring using explainable AI: bridging trust in predictive healthcare.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Exploring Older Adults' Perspectives and Acceptance of AI-Driven Health Technologies: Qualitative Study.JMIR aging · 2025Article
- Individual Factors That Affect Laypeople's Understanding of Definitions of Medical Jargon.Health policy and technology · 2024Article
- Automated Diagnosis of Knee Osteoarthritis Using ResNet101 on a DEEP:PHI: Leveraging a No-Code AI Platform for Efficient and Accurate Medical Image Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Efficacy of ChatGPT as a Patient Education Tool in Prostate Cancer: Multimetric Assessment.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Trust in and Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Medicine: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
- Trust and stakeholder perspectives on the implementation of AI tools in clinical radiology.European radiology · 2024Article
- Existing Barriers Faced by and Future Design Recommendations for Direct-to-Consumer Health Care Artificial Intelligence Apps: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Artificial Intelligence Decision-Making Transparency and Employees' Trust: The Parallel Multiple Mediating Effect of Effectiveness and Discomfort.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Article
- Information, collaboration, regulation: Physician and AI researcher views on ethical considerations in clinical AI integration.Big data & societyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ongoing research efforts have been examining how to utilize artificial intelligence technology to help healthcare consumers make sense of their clinical data, such as diagnostic radiology reports. How to promote the acceptance of such novel technology is a heated research topic. Recent studies highlight the importance of providing local explanations about AI prediction and model performance to help users determine whether to trust AI's predictions. Despite some efforts, limited empirical research has been conducted to quantitatively measure how AI explanations impact healthcare consumers' perceptions of using patient-facing, AI-powered healthcare systems. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of different AI explanations on people's perceptions of AI-powered healthcare system. In this work, we designed and deployed a large-scale experiment (N = 3,423) on Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) to evaluate the effects of AI explanations on people's perceptions in the context of comprehending radiology reports. We created four groups based on two factors-the extent of explanations for the prediction (High vs. Low Transparency) and the model performance (Good vs. Weak AI Model)-and randomly assigned participants to one of the four conditions. Participants were instructed to classify a radiology report as describing a normal or abnormal finding, followed by completing a post-study survey to indicate their perceptions of the AI tool. We found that revealing model performance information can promote people's trust and perceived usefulness of system outputs, while providing local explanations for the rationale of a prediction can promote understandability but not necessarily trust. We also found that when model performance is low, the more information the AI system discloses, the less people would trust the system. Lastly, whether human agrees with AI predictions or not and whether the AI prediction is correct or not could also influence the effect of AI explanations. We conclude this paper by discussing implications for designing AI systems for healthcare consumers to interpret diagnostic report.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33948743What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.