ArticleBMC health services research2025
Sociotechnical influences on the adoption and use of AI-enabled clinical decision support systems in ophthalmology: a theory-based interview study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence adoption in healthcare: a systematic review of implementation challenges and health services implications.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Determinants of the Public's Behavioral Intention to Adopt AI-Assisted Lung Cancer Screening: An Extended UTAUT Model Integrating Trust and Risk.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Beyond morphology: imaging the glioblastoma microenvironment in the era of quantitative neuro-oncology.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Me, my doctor and AI: a qualitative interview study on patients' requirements for trustworthy use of AI-CDSS in ophthalmology.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Article
- Sociotechnical-systems analysis of IoT-AI convergence in cosmetic health.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to ease the increasing workload in ophthalmology by supporting ophthalmologists’ clinical decision-making. However, despite regulatory approvals, the adoption and use of AI-enabled clinical decision support systems (AI-CDSS) in ophthalmology remains limited. Critical obstacles that innovative healthcare technologies such as AI-CDSS face on their path to widespread clinical use are nonadoption and abandonment by their intended users, which prevent broader dissemination and real clinical benefit. This study explores how to overcome nonadoption and prevent abandonment of ophthalmic AI-CDSS by identifying ophthalmology professionals’ requirements for adoption and continued use of such tools in clinical practice.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 22 ophthalmology professionals from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, representing a range of professional roles, clinical settings, and extent of AI-CDSS experience. To explore sociotechnical factors shaping ophthalmology professionals’ adoption decisions and their ability to derive added value from ophthalmic AI-CDSS, we conducted a qualitative content analysis combining deductive and inductive coding. The Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework deductively guided the development of higher-level code categories, representing seven sociotechnical domains relevant for the implementation of healthcare technologies. These were further refined into subcategories through inductive coding of the interview material.
resultsMost participants expressed general openness to ophthalmic AI-CDSS. However, actual adoption decisions and the ability to derive clinical value from these tools were shaped not just by individual attitudes but also by a range of other sociotechnical influences. Specifically, we inductively identified 29 code categories, representing sociotechnical influences and requirements from all seven NASSS domains, including technological, user, organizational, and societal aspects. Our findings also suggest that while many sociotechnical influences and challenges are shared between AI-based and traditional healthcare technologies, a key distinction of (ophthalmic) AI-CDSS lies in the users’ psychological appraisal of such tools.
conclusionsOur findings highlight the complex and context-specific nature of integrating AI-CDSS into ophthalmic practice. This study also informs AI and healthcare researchers on the applicability of the NASSS framework for studying AI implementation and provides actionable insights for AI developers and implementers aiming to address user needs more effectively.
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.