Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40568450›Full record

ArticleJournal of multimorbidity and comorbidity

Value of using artificial intelligence derived clusters by health and social care need in primary care: A qualitative interview study with patients living with multiple long-term conditions, carers and health care professionals.

Sian Holt, Glenn Simpson, Miriam Santer, Hazel Everitt, Andrew Farmer, Kuangji Zhou, Zhiling Qian, Firoza Davies, Hajira Dambha-Miller, Leanne Morrison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multimorbidity and comorbidity. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Sian HoltPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5448-3499
Glenn SimpsonPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Miriam SanterPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Hazel EverittPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Andrew FarmerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Kuangji ZhouSchool of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Zhiling QianSchool of Psychology, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Firoza DaviesPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Hajira Dambha-MillerPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Leanne MorrisonPrimary Care Research Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: People living with MLTCs attending primary care often have unmet social care needs (SCNs), which can be challenging to identify and address. Artificial intelligence (AI) derived clusters could help to identify patients at risk of SCNs. Evidence is needed on views about the use of AI-derived clusters, to inform acceptable and meaningful implementation within interventions. Method: Qualitative semi-structured interviews (online and telephone), including a description of AI-derived clusters and a tailored vignette, with 24 people living with MLTCs and 20 people involved in the care of MLTCs (carers and health care professionals). Interviews were analysed using Reflexive and Codebook Thematic Analysis. Results: Primary care was viewed as an appropriate place to have conversations about SCNs. However, participants felt health care professionals lack capacity to have these conversations and to identify support. AI was perceived as a tool that could potentially increase capacity but only when supplemented with effective, clinical conversations. Interventions harnessing AI should be brief, be easy to use and remain relevant over time, to ensure no additional burden on clinical capacity. Interventions must allow flexibility to be used by multidisciplinary teams within primary care, frame messages positively and facilitate conversations that remain patient centered. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that implementing AI-derived clusters to identify and support SCNs in primary care is perceived as valuable and can be used as a tool to inform and prioritse effective clinical conversations. But concerns must be addressed, including how AI-derived clusters can be used in a way that considers personal context.

Indexed as

artificial intelligenceintegrated careinterview studymultimorbiditypersonalised care

Identifiers

PMID40568450
PMCPMC12188064

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.