ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
Primary Care Physician Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence for Dementia Screening: A Qualitative Study.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundAutomated approaches to cognitive impairment screening may soon achieve sufficient levels of accuracy for clinical implementation but they present potentially serious ethical challenges. Overcoming such challenges for successful implementation of automated screening may depend on the perspective of the clinicians who are its intended users.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study of internal medicine, geriatrics and family medicine physicians recruited from ambulatory practices in New York City, NY to identify ethical challenges of implementing automated CI screening (
resultsParticipants reported routine screening for cognitive impairment only in the context of the Medicare annual wellness visit and generally avoided routine screening because of limited treatment options to support patients, such as poor access to geriatrics/neuropsychiatric services. Thematic analysis revealed several perceived benefits: enhanced clinical efficiency, engagement in cognitive healthcare of their patients, and expanded access to cognitive care. They identified several potential challenges with ethics implications: concerns about accuracy of the technology, bias, difficulty communicating the technology and results to patients and caregivers that could impact their ability to provide informed consent, and risks to patients (privacy, stigmatization and insurability). They noted that without more health system infrastructure to support patients with dementia, the benefits of automated screening would be limited.
conclusionsPhysicians identified several critical ethical challenges to automated CI screening. Health systems will need to address these challenges to ensure benefit for and the safety, autonomy and privacy of patients and ultimately, the successful implementation of such technology.
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.