Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39102675›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2024

Predictors of Health Care Practitioners' Intention to Use AI-Enabled Clinical Decision Support Systems: Meta-Analysis Based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.

Julius Dingel, Anne-Kathrin Kleine, Julia Cecil, Anna Leonie Sigl, Eva Lermer, Susanne Gaube

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Factors Associated with AI Use in a Norwegian Sample.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Julius Dingel *Human-AI-Interaction Group, Center for Leadership and People Management, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0009-0009-5512-9657
Anne-Kathrin Kleine *Human-AI-Interaction Group, Center for Leadership and People Management, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1919-2834
Julia CecilHuman-AI-Interaction Group, Center for Leadership and People Management, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4964-925X
Anna Leonie SiglDepartment of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Technical University of Applied Sciences Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.ORCID 0009-0005-4197-0390
Eva LermerHuman-AI-Interaction Group, Center for Leadership and People Management, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6600-9580
Susanne GaubeHuman Factors in Healthcare, Global Business School for Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1633-4772

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence-enabled clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSSs) offer potential for improving health care outcomes, but their adoption among health care practitioners remains limited.

objectiveThis meta-analysis identified predictors influencing health care practitioners' intention to use AI-CDSSs based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Additional predictors were examined based on existing empirical evidence.

methodsThe literature search using electronic databases, forward searches, conference programs, and personal correspondence yielded 7731 results, of which 17 (0.22%) studies met the inclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis, relative weight analyses, and meta-analytic moderation and mediation analyses were used to examine the relationships between relevant predictor variables and the intention to use AI-CDSSs.

resultsThe meta-analysis results supported the application of the UTAUT to the context of the intention to use AI-CDSSs. The results showed that performance expectancy (r=0.66), effort expectancy (r=0.55), social influence (r=0.66), and facilitating conditions (r=0.66) were positively associated with the intention to use AI-CDSSs, in line with the predictions of the UTAUT. The meta-analysis further identified positive attitude (r=0.63), trust (r=0.73), anxiety (r=-0.41), perceived risk (r=-0.21), and innovativeness (r=0.54) as additional relevant predictors. Trust emerged as the most influential predictor overall. The results of the moderation analyses show that the relationship between social influence and use intention becomes weaker with increasing age. In addition, the relationship between effort expectancy and use intention was stronger for diagnostic AI-CDSSs than for devices that combined diagnostic and treatment recommendations. Finally, the relationship between facilitating conditions and use intention was mediated through performance and effort expectancy.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis contributes to the understanding of the predictors of intention to use AI-CDSSs based on an extended UTAUT model. More research is needed to substantiate the identified relationships and explain the observed variations in effect sizes by identifying relevant moderating factors. The research findings bear important implications for the design and implementation of training programs for health care practitioners to ease the adoption of AI-CDSSs into their practice.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDecision Support Systems, ClinicalHealth PersonnelIntentionAttitude of Health PersonnelHumansAI-CDSSsartificial intelligence–enabled clinical decision support systemshealth care practitionersmeta-analysisUnified Theory of Acceptance and Use of TechnologyUTAUT

Identifiers

PMID39102675
PMCPMC11333871

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.