Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40249341›Full record

Trial reportJMIR medical informatics2025

Effect of Uncertainty-Aware AI Models on Pharmacists' Reaction Time and Decision-Making in a Web-Based Mock Medication Verification Task: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Corey Lester, Brigid Rowell, Yifan Zheng, Zoe Co, Vincent Marshall, Jin Yong Kim, Qiyuan Chen, Raed Kontar, X Jessie Yang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JMIR medical informatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Pharmacists' propensity to trust automated technologies: A demographic analysis.Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhA
    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

9 authors.

Corey LesterDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, 428 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States, 1 734-647-8849.ORCID 0000-0001-8774-793X
Brigid RowellDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, 428 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States, 1 734-647-8849.ORCID 0000-0002-8469-899X
Yifan ZhengDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, 428 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States, 1 734-647-8849.ORCID 0000-0002-6997-735X
Zoe CoDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, 428 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States, 1 734-647-8849.ORCID 0000-0003-3656-0459
Vincent MarshallDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan, 428 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States, 1 734-647-8849.ORCID 0000-0002-2594-7407
Jin Yong KimDepartment of Industrial and Operations Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-1626-7204
Qiyuan ChenDepartment of Industrial and Operations Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0009-0006-4112-014X
Raed KontarDepartment of Industrial and Operations Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4546-324X
X Jessie YangDepartment of Industrial and Operations Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6071-0387

Funding

Preventing medication dispensing errors in pharmacy practice with interpretable machine intelligenceR01LM013624 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI AL KONTAR, RAED, LESTER, COREY A · 2021 to 2024
$1.2M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM013624
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support systems are increasingly used in health care. Uncertainty-aware AI presents the model's confidence in its decision alongside its prediction, whereas black-box AI only provides a prediction. Little is known about how this type of AI affects health care providers' work performance and reaction time. Objective: This study aimed to determine the effects of black-box and uncertainty-aware AI advice on pharmacist decision-making and reaction time. Methods: Recruitment emails were sent to pharmacists through professional listservs describing a web-based, crossover, randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to the black-box AI or uncertainty-aware AI condition in a 1:1 manner. Participants completed 100 mock verification tasks with AI help and 100 without AI help. The order of no help and AI help was randomized. Participants were exposed to correct and incorrect prescription fills, where the correct decision was to "accept" or "reject," respectively. AI help provided correct (79%) or incorrect (21%) advice. Reaction times, participant decisions, AI advice, and AI help type were recorded for each verification. Likelihood ratio tests compared means across the three categories of AI type for each level of AI correctness. Results: A total of 30 participants provided complete datasets. An equal number of participants were in each AI condition. Participants' decision-making performance and reaction times differed across the 3 conditions. Accurate AI recommendations resulted in the rejection of the incorrect drug 96.1% and 91.8% of the time for uncertainty-aware AI and black-box AI respectively, compared with 81.2% without AI help. Correctly dispensed medications were accepted at rates of 99.2% with black-box help, 94.1% with uncertainty-aware AI help, and 94.6% without AI help. Uncertainty-aware AI protected against bad AI advice to approve an incorrectly filled medication compared with black-box AI (83.3% vs 76.7%). When the AI recommended rejecting a correctly filled medication, pharmacists without AI help had a higher rate of correctly accepting the medication (94.6%) compared with uncertainty-aware AI help (86.2%) and black-box AI help (81.2%). Uncertainty-aware AI resulted in shorter reaction times than black-box AI and no AI help except in the scenario where "AI rejects the correct drug." Black-box AI did not lead to reduced reaction times compared with pharmacists acting alone. Conclusions: Pharmacists' performance and reaction times varied by AI type and AI accuracy. Overall, uncertainty-aware AI resulted in faster decision-making and acted as a safeguard against bad AI advice to approve a misfilled medication. Conversely, black-box AI had the longest reaction times, and user performance degraded in the presence of bad AI advice. However, uncertainty-aware AI could result in unnecessary double-checks, but it is preferred over false negative advice, where patients receive the wrong medication. These results highlight the importance of well-designed AI that addresses users' needs, enhances performance, and avoids overreliance on AI.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceDecision MakingPharmacistsReaction TimeAdultCross-Over StudiesDecision Support Systems, ClinicalFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedUncertaintyAIartificial intelligenceclinical decision supportclinical decision support systemsdecision-makingdiagnosisdrugdrug developmenthuman-computer interactionhuman factorspharmacistpredictionrandomized controlled trialverification

Identifiers

PMID40249341
PMCPMC12023801

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.