Patient trust in the use of machine learning-based clinical decision support systems in psychiatric services: A randomized survey experiment.

IF 7.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY European Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.1790
Erik Perfalk, Martin Bernstorff, Andreas Aalkjær Danielsen, Søren Dinesen Østergaard
{"title":"Patient trust in the use of machine learning-based clinical decision support systems in psychiatric services: A randomized survey experiment.","authors":"Erik Perfalk, Martin Bernstorff, Andreas Aalkjær Danielsen, Søren Dinesen Østergaard","doi":"10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.1790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) based on machine-learning (ML) models are emerging within psychiatry. If patients do not trust this technology, its implementation may disrupt the patient-clinician relationship. Therefore, the aim was to examine whether receiving basic information about ML-based CDSS increased trust in them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted an online randomized survey experiment in the Psychiatric Services of the Central Denmark Region. The participating patients were randomized into one of three arms: Intervention = information on clinical decision-making supported by an ML model; Active control = information on a standard clinical decision process, and Blank control = no information. The participants were unaware of the experiment. Subsequently, participants were asked about different aspects of trust and distrust regarding ML-based CDSS. The effect of the intervention was assessed by comparing scores of trust and distrust between the allocation arms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 5800 invitees, 992 completed the survey experiment. The intervention increased trust in ML-based CDSS when compared to the active control (mean increase in trust: 5% [95% CI: 1%; 9%], <i>p</i> = 0.0096) and the blank control arm (mean increase in trust: 4% [1%; 8%], <i>p</i> = 0.015). Similarly, the intervention reduced distrust in ML-based CDSS when compared to the active control (mean decrease in distrust: -3%[-1%; -5%], <i>p</i> = 0.021) and the blank control arm (mean decrease in distrust: -4% [-1%; -8%], <i>p</i> = 0.022). No statistically significant differences were observed between the active and the blank control arms.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Receiving basic information on ML-based CDSS in hospital psychiatry may increase patient trust in such systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":12155,"journal":{"name":"European Psychiatry","volume":"67 1","pages":"e72"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.1790","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Clinical decision support systems (CDSS) based on machine-learning (ML) models are emerging within psychiatry. If patients do not trust this technology, its implementation may disrupt the patient-clinician relationship. Therefore, the aim was to examine whether receiving basic information about ML-based CDSS increased trust in them.

Methods: We conducted an online randomized survey experiment in the Psychiatric Services of the Central Denmark Region. The participating patients were randomized into one of three arms: Intervention = information on clinical decision-making supported by an ML model; Active control = information on a standard clinical decision process, and Blank control = no information. The participants were unaware of the experiment. Subsequently, participants were asked about different aspects of trust and distrust regarding ML-based CDSS. The effect of the intervention was assessed by comparing scores of trust and distrust between the allocation arms.

Results: Out of 5800 invitees, 992 completed the survey experiment. The intervention increased trust in ML-based CDSS when compared to the active control (mean increase in trust: 5% [95% CI: 1%; 9%], p = 0.0096) and the blank control arm (mean increase in trust: 4% [1%; 8%], p = 0.015). Similarly, the intervention reduced distrust in ML-based CDSS when compared to the active control (mean decrease in distrust: -3%[-1%; -5%], p = 0.021) and the blank control arm (mean decrease in distrust: -4% [-1%; -8%], p = 0.022). No statistically significant differences were observed between the active and the blank control arms.

Conclusions: Receiving basic information on ML-based CDSS in hospital psychiatry may increase patient trust in such systems.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
患者对精神科使用基于机器学习的临床决策支持系统的信任度:随机调查实验。
背景:基于机器学习(ML)模型的临床决策支持系统(CDSS)正在精神病学领域兴起。如果患者不信任这种技术,其实施可能会破坏患者与医生之间的关系。因此,我们的目的是研究获得有关基于 ML 的 CDSS 的基本信息是否会增加对它们的信任:我们在丹麦中部地区的精神病服务机构进行了一次在线随机调查实验。参与实验的患者被随机分为三组:干预组=由 ML 模型支持的临床决策信息;积极对照组=标准临床决策过程信息;空白对照组=无信息。参与者对实验一无所知。随后,参与者被问及对基于 ML 的 CDSS 信任和不信任的不同方面。通过比较分配组之间的信任和不信任得分来评估干预效果:在 5800 名受邀者中,992 人完成了调查实验。与积极对照组(信任度平均增加 5% [95% CI:1%;9%],p = 0.0096)和空白对照组(信任度平均增加 4% [1%;8%],p = 0.015)相比,干预增加了对基于 ML 的 CDSS 的信任。同样,与积极对照组(不信任度平均下降率:-3%[-1%;-5%],p = 0.021)和空白对照组(不信任度平均下降率:-4%[-1%;-8%],p = 0.022)相比,干预措施降低了基于 ML 的 CDSS 的不信任度。在积极对照组和空白对照组之间没有观察到明显的统计学差异:结论:在医院精神科接受有关基于 ML 的 CDSS 的基本信息可提高患者对此类系统的信任度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Psychiatry
European Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
3.80%
发文量
2338
审稿时长
4.5 weeks
期刊介绍: European Psychiatry, the official journal of the European Psychiatric Association, is dedicated to sharing cutting-edge research, policy updates, and fostering dialogue among clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates in the fields of psychiatry, mental health, behavioral science, and neuroscience. This peer-reviewed, Open Access journal strives to publish the latest advancements across various mental health issues, including diagnostic and treatment breakthroughs, as well as advancements in understanding the biological foundations of mental, behavioral, and cognitive functions in both clinical and general population studies.
期刊最新文献
Let's focus on the insula in addiction: A refined anatomical exploration of insula in severe alcohol and cocaine use disorders. Predictors for improvement in personality functioning during outpatient psychotherapy: A machine learning approach within a psychodynamic psychotherapy sample. Relationships between cognition, functioning, and quality of life of euthymic patients with bipolar disorder: Structural equation modeling with the FACE-BD cohort. A never-ending story: The COVID-19 pandemic and the increase of hospital admissions for typical and atypical anorexia nervosa in children, adolescents and young adults in the post-pandemic era in Germany. Suicidal transition rates and their predictors in the adult general population: a repeated survey over 21 years in France.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1