Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38573756›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2024

Understanding Physician's Perspectives on AI in Health Care: Protocol for a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Vignette Study.

Jane Paik Kim, Hyun-Joon Yang, Bohye Kim, Katie Ryan, Laura Weiss Roberts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Jane Paik KimDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1475-9822
Hyun-Joon YangDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4424-2514
Bohye KimDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2273-1675
Katie RyanDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1437-3126
Laura Weiss RobertsDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4270-253X

Funding

Stakeholder Guidance to Anticipate and Address Ethical Challenges in Applications of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Algorithmic Medicine: a Novel Empirical ApproachR01TR003505 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI KIM, JANE PAIK · 2020 to 2023
$1.8M
NCATS NIH HHS R01 TR003505
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs the availability and performance of artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support (CDS) systems improve, physicians and other care providers poised to be on the front lines will be increasingly tasked with using these tools in patient care and incorporating their outputs into clinical decision-making processes. Vignette studies provide a means to explore emerging hypotheses regarding how context-specific factors, such as clinical risk, the amount of information provided about the AI, and the AI result, may impact physician acceptance and use of AI-based CDS tools. To best anticipate how such factors influence the decision-making of frontline physicians in clinical scenarios involving AI decision-support tools, hypothesis-driven research is needed that enables scenario testing before the implementation and deployment of these tools.

objectiveThis study's objectives are to (1) design an original, web-based vignette-based survey that features hypothetical scenarios based on emerging or real-world applications of AI-based CDS systems that will vary systematically by features related to clinical risk, the amount of information provided about the AI, and the AI result; and (2) test and determine causal effects of specific factors on the judgments and perceptions salient to physicians' clinical decision-making.

methodsUS-based physicians with specialties in family or internal medicine will be recruited through email and mail (target n=420). Through a web-based survey, participants will be randomized to a 3-part "sequential multiple assignment randomization trial (SMART) vignette" detailing a hypothetical clinical scenario involving an AI decision support tool. The SMART vignette design is similar to the SMART design but adapted to a survey design. Each respondent will be randomly assigned to 1 of the possible vignette variations of the factors we are testing at each stage, which include the level of clinical risk, the amount of information provided about the AI, and the certainty of the AI output. Respondents will be given questions regarding their hypothetical decision-making in response to the hypothetical scenarios.

resultsThe study is currently in progress and data collection is anticipated to be completed in 2024.

conclusionsThe web-based vignette study will provide information on how contextual factors such as clinical risk, the amount of information provided about an AI tool, and the AI result influence physicians' reactions to hypothetical scenarios that are based on emerging applications of AI in frontline health care settings. Our newly proposed "SMART vignette" design offers several benefits not afforded by the extensively used traditional vignette design, due to the 2 aforementioned features. These advantages are (1) increased validity of analyses targeted at understanding the impact of a factor on the decision outcome, given previous outcomes and other contextual factors; and (2) balanced sample sizes across groups. This study will generate a better understanding of physician decision-making within this context. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/54787.

Indexed as

AI-based clinical decision supportdecision-makingethicshypothesis-driven researchhypothetical vignettesphysician perspectivestakeholder attitudesweb-based survey

Identifiers

PMID38573756
PMCPMC11027055

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.