Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36848339›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Implementing artificial intelligence in Canadian primary care: Barriers and strategies identified through a national deliberative dialogue.

Katrina Darcel, Tara Upshaw, Amy Craig-Neil, Jillian Macklin, Carolyn Steele Gray, Timothy C Y Chan, Jennifer Gibson, Andrew D Pinto

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Atencion primaria · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. AI and Primary Care: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Katrina DarcelUpstream Lab, MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Tara UpshawUpstream Lab, MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Amy Craig-NeilUpstream Lab, MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jillian MacklinUpstream Lab, MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Carolyn Steele GrayBridgepoint Collaboratory for Research and Innovation, Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Timothy C Y ChanDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4128-1692
Jennifer GibsonJoint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew D PintoUpstream Lab, MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1841-9347

Funding

CIHR 156885
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith large volumes of longitudinal data in electronic medical records from diverse patients, primary care is primed for disruption by artificial intelligence (AI) technology. With AI applications in primary care still at an early stage in Canada and most countries, there is a unique opportunity to engage key stakeholders in exploring how AI would be used and what implementation would look like.

objectiveTo identify the barriers that patients, providers, and health leaders perceive in relation to implementing AI in primary care and strategies to overcome them.

design12 virtual deliberative dialogues. Dialogue data were thematically analyzed using a combination of rapid ethnographic assessment and interpretive description techniques.

settingVirtual sessions.

participantsParticipants from eight provinces in Canada, including 22 primary care service users, 21 interprofessional providers, and 5 health system leaders.

resultsThe barriers that emerged from the deliberative dialogue sessions were grouped into four themes: (1) system and data readiness, (2) the potential for bias and inequity, (3) the regulation of AI and big data, and (4) the importance of people as technology enablers. Strategies to overcome the barriers in each of these themes were highlighted, where participatory co-design and iterative implementation were voiced most strongly by participants. LIMITATIONS: Only five health system leaders were included in the study and no self-identifying Indigenous people. This is a limitation as both groups may have provided unique perspectives to the study objective.

conclusionsThese findings provide insight into the barriers and facilitators associated with implementing AI in primary care settings from different perspectives. This will be vital as decisions regarding the future of AI in this space is shaped.

Indexed as

Anthropology, CulturalArtificial IntelligenceBig DataCanadaHumansPrimary Health Care

Identifiers

PMID36848339
PMCPMC9970060

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.