ArticleDigital health
Embedding artificial intelligence in healthcare: An ethnographic exploration of an AI-based mHealth app through the lens of legitimacy.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Navigating Legitimacy in the Development of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Diagnostics: A Qualitative Study.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Skin cancer, a significant global health problem, imposes financial and workload burdens on the Dutch healthcare system. Artificial intelligence (AI) for diagnostic augmentation has gained momentum in dermatology, but despite significant research on adoption, acceptance, and implementation, we lack a holistic understanding of why technologies (do not) become embedded in the healthcare system. This study utilizes the concept of legitimacy, omnipresent but underexplored in health technology studies, to examine assumptions guiding the integration of an AI mHealth app for skin lesion cancer risk assessment in the Dutch healthcare system. Methods: We conducted a 3-year ethnographic case study, using participant observation, interviews, focus groups, and document analysis to explore app integration within the Dutch healthcare system. Participants included doctors, policymakers, app users, developers, insurers, and researchers. Our analysis focused on moments of legitimacy breakdown, contrasting company narratives and healthcare-based assumptions with practices and affectively-charged experiences of professionals and app users. Results: Three major kinds of legitimacy breakdowns impacted the embedding of this app: first, lack of institutional legitimacy led to informal workarounds by the company at the institutional level; second, quantification privilege impacted app influence in interactions with doctors; and third, interactive limits between users and the app contradicted expectations around ease of use and work burden alleviation. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that legitimacy is a useful lens for understanding the embedding of health technology while taking into account institutional complexity. A legitimacy lens is helpful for decision-makers and researchers because it can clarify and anticipate pain points for the integration of AI into healthcare systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.