Artificial Intelligence in Medical Care – Patients' Perceptions on Caregiving Relationships and Ethics: A Qualitative Study

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Expectations Pub Date : 2025-03-17 DOI:10.1111/hex.70216
Jana Gundlack, Sarah Negash, Carolin Thiel, Charlotte Buch, Jan Schildmann, Susanne Unverzagt, Rafael Mikolajczyk, Thomas Frese, PEAK consortium
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Medical Care – Patients' Perceptions on Caregiving Relationships and Ethics: A Qualitative Study","authors":"Jana Gundlack,&nbsp;Sarah Negash,&nbsp;Carolin Thiel,&nbsp;Charlotte Buch,&nbsp;Jan Schildmann,&nbsp;Susanne Unverzagt,&nbsp;Rafael Mikolajczyk,&nbsp;Thomas Frese,&nbsp;PEAK consortium","doi":"10.1111/hex.70216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Artificial intelligence (AI) offers several opportunities to enhance medical care, but practical application is limited. Consideration of patient needs is essential for the successful implementation of AI-based systems. Few studies have explored patients' perceptions, especially in Germany, resulting in insufficient exploration of perspectives of outpatients, older patients and patients with chronic diseases. We aimed to explore how patients perceive AI in medical care, focusing on relationships to physicians and ethical aspects.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a qualitative study with six semi-structured focus groups from June 2022 to March 2023. We analysed data using a content analysis approach by systemising the textual material via a coding system. Participants were mostly recruited from outpatient settings in the regions of Halle and Erlangen, Germany. They were enrolled primarily through convenience sampling supplemented by purposive sampling.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Patients (<i>N</i> = 35; 13 females, 22 males) with a median age of 50 years participated. Participants were mixed in socioeconomic status and affinity for new technology. Most had chronic diseases. Perceived main advantages of AI were its efficient and flawless functioning, its ability to process and provide large data volume, and increased patient safety. Major perceived disadvantages were impersonality, potential data security issues, and fear of errors based on medical staff relying too much on AI. A dominant theme was that human interaction, personal conversation, and understanding of emotions cannot be replaced by AI. Participants emphasised the need to involve everyone in the informing process about AI. Most considered physicians as responsible for decisions resulting from AI applications. Transparency of data use and data protection were other important points.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Patients could generally imagine AI as support in medical care if its usage is focused on patient well-being and the human relationship is maintained. Including patients' needs in the development of AI and adequate communication about AI systems are essential for successful implementation in practice.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>Patients' perceptions as participants in this study were crucial. Further, patients assessed the presentation and comprehensibility of the research material during a pretest, and recommended adaptations were implemented. After each FG, space was provided for requesting modifications and discussion.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"28 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70216","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70216","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI) offers several opportunities to enhance medical care, but practical application is limited. Consideration of patient needs is essential for the successful implementation of AI-based systems. Few studies have explored patients' perceptions, especially in Germany, resulting in insufficient exploration of perspectives of outpatients, older patients and patients with chronic diseases. We aimed to explore how patients perceive AI in medical care, focusing on relationships to physicians and ethical aspects.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative study with six semi-structured focus groups from June 2022 to March 2023. We analysed data using a content analysis approach by systemising the textual material via a coding system. Participants were mostly recruited from outpatient settings in the regions of Halle and Erlangen, Germany. They were enrolled primarily through convenience sampling supplemented by purposive sampling.

Results

Patients (N = 35; 13 females, 22 males) with a median age of 50 years participated. Participants were mixed in socioeconomic status and affinity for new technology. Most had chronic diseases. Perceived main advantages of AI were its efficient and flawless functioning, its ability to process and provide large data volume, and increased patient safety. Major perceived disadvantages were impersonality, potential data security issues, and fear of errors based on medical staff relying too much on AI. A dominant theme was that human interaction, personal conversation, and understanding of emotions cannot be replaced by AI. Participants emphasised the need to involve everyone in the informing process about AI. Most considered physicians as responsible for decisions resulting from AI applications. Transparency of data use and data protection were other important points.

Conclusions

Patients could generally imagine AI as support in medical care if its usage is focused on patient well-being and the human relationship is maintained. Including patients' needs in the development of AI and adequate communication about AI systems are essential for successful implementation in practice.

Patient or Public Contribution

Patients' perceptions as participants in this study were crucial. Further, patients assessed the presentation and comprehensibility of the research material during a pretest, and recommended adaptations were implemented. After each FG, space was provided for requesting modifications and discussion.

Abstract Image

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
期刊最新文献
Mobilizing the Power of Lived/Living Experiences to Improve Health Outcomes for all Outpatient Virtual Care Among People Living With and Beyond Cancer From Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Backgrounds in Australia: A Protocol for a Realist Evaluation Under-Served Groups and Myalgic Encephalomyelitis Research Workshop; Multiple Barriers to Effective Healthcare, Research and Public Participation Artificial Intelligence in Medical Care – Patients' Perceptions on Caregiving Relationships and Ethics: A Qualitative Study Exploring Long Covid Prevalence and Patient Uncertainty by Sociodemographic Characteristics Using GP Patient Survey Data
×
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