初级保健中的人工智能与卫生不公平:系统的范围审查和框架。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE Family Medicine and Community Health Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1136/fmch-2022-001670
Alexander d'Elia, Mark Gabbay, Sarah Rodgers, Ciara Kierans, Elisa Jones, Irum Durrani, Adele Thomas, Lucy Frith
{"title":"初级保健中的人工智能与卫生不公平:系统的范围审查和框架。","authors":"Alexander d'Elia,&nbsp;Mark Gabbay,&nbsp;Sarah Rodgers,&nbsp;Ciara Kierans,&nbsp;Elisa Jones,&nbsp;Irum Durrani,&nbsp;Adele Thomas,&nbsp;Lucy Frith","doi":"10.1136/fmch-2022-001670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) will have a significant impact on healthcare over the coming decade. At the same time, health inequity remains one of the biggest challenges. Primary care is both a driver and a mitigator of health inequities and with AI gaining traction in primary care, there is a need for a holistic understanding of how AI affect health inequities, through the act of providing care and through potential system effects. This paper presents a systematic scoping review of the ways AI implementation in primary care may impact health inequity.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Following a systematic scoping review approach, we searched for literature related to AI, health inequity, and implementation challenges of AI in primary care. In addition, articles from primary exploratory searches were added, and through reference screening.The results were thematically summarised and used to produce both a narrative and conceptual model for the mechanisms by which social determinants of health and AI in primary care could interact to either improve or worsen health inequities.Two public advisors were involved in the review process.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>Peer-reviewed publications and grey literature in English and Scandinavian languages.</p><p><strong>Information sources: </strong>PubMed, SCOPUS and JSTOR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1529 publications were identified, of which 86 met the inclusion criteria. The findings were summarised under six different domains, covering both positive and negative effects: (1) access, (2) trust, (3) dehumanisation, (4) agency for self-care, (5) algorithmic bias and (6) external effects. The five first domains cover aspects of the interface between the patient and the primary care system, while the last domain covers care system-wide and societal effects of AI in primary care. A graphical model has been produced to illustrate this. Community involvement throughout the whole process of designing and implementing of AI in primary care was a common suggestion to mitigate the potential negative effects of AI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AI has the potential to affect health inequities through a multitude of ways, both directly in the patient consultation and through transformative system effects. This review summarises these effects from a system tive and provides a base for future research into responsible implementation.</p>","PeriodicalId":44590,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine and Community Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d5/c2/fmch-2022-001670.PMC9716837.pdf","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artificial intelligence and health inequities in primary care: a systematic scoping review and framework.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander d'Elia,&nbsp;Mark Gabbay,&nbsp;Sarah Rodgers,&nbsp;Ciara Kierans,&nbsp;Elisa Jones,&nbsp;Irum Durrani,&nbsp;Adele Thomas,&nbsp;Lucy Frith\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/fmch-2022-001670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) will have a significant impact on healthcare over the coming decade. At the same time, health inequity remains one of the biggest challenges. Primary care is both a driver and a mitigator of health inequities and with AI gaining traction in primary care, there is a need for a holistic understanding of how AI affect health inequities, through the act of providing care and through potential system effects. This paper presents a systematic scoping review of the ways AI implementation in primary care may impact health inequity.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Following a systematic scoping review approach, we searched for literature related to AI, health inequity, and implementation challenges of AI in primary care. In addition, articles from primary exploratory searches were added, and through reference screening.The results were thematically summarised and used to produce both a narrative and conceptual model for the mechanisms by which social determinants of health and AI in primary care could interact to either improve or worsen health inequities.Two public advisors were involved in the review process.</p><p><strong>Eligibility criteria: </strong>Peer-reviewed publications and grey literature in English and Scandinavian languages.</p><p><strong>Information sources: </strong>PubMed, SCOPUS and JSTOR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1529 publications were identified, of which 86 met the inclusion criteria. The findings were summarised under six different domains, covering both positive and negative effects: (1) access, (2) trust, (3) dehumanisation, (4) agency for self-care, (5) algorithmic bias and (6) external effects. The five first domains cover aspects of the interface between the patient and the primary care system, while the last domain covers care system-wide and societal effects of AI in primary care. A graphical model has been produced to illustrate this. Community involvement throughout the whole process of designing and implementing of AI in primary care was a common suggestion to mitigate the potential negative effects of AI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AI has the potential to affect health inequities through a multitude of ways, both directly in the patient consultation and through transformative system effects. This review summarises these effects from a system tive and provides a base for future research into responsible implementation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44590,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Family Medicine and Community Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/d5/c2/fmch-2022-001670.PMC9716837.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Family Medicine and Community Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2022-001670\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2022-001670","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

目标:人工智能(AI)将在未来十年对医疗保健产生重大影响。与此同时,卫生不平等仍然是最大的挑战之一。初级保健既是卫生不公平现象的推动者,也是缓解者。随着人工智能在初级保健领域的发展,有必要全面了解人工智能如何通过提供护理的行为和潜在的系统影响影响卫生不公平现象。本文对人工智能在初级保健中的实施可能影响健康不平等的方式进行了系统的范围审查。设计:采用系统的范围审查方法,我们检索了与人工智能、健康不平等和人工智能在初级保健中的实施挑战相关的文献。此外,从主要探索性搜索文章被添加,并通过参考筛选。对研究结果进行了主题总结,并用于建立一个叙事和概念模型,说明健康的社会决定因素和初级保健中的人工智能可以相互作用,以改善或加剧卫生不公平现象。两名公共顾问参与了审查过程。资格标准:英语和斯堪的纳维亚语言的同行评审出版物和灰色文献。信息来源:PubMed, SCOPUS和JSTOR。结果:共纳入文献1529篇,其中86篇符合纳入标准。研究结果总结在六个不同的领域,涵盖了积极和消极的影响:(1)访问,(2)信任,(3)非人性化,(4)自我照顾代理,(5)算法偏见和(6)外部影响。前五个领域涵盖了患者和初级保健系统之间的接口方面,而最后一个领域涵盖了整个护理系统和人工智能在初级保健中的社会影响。已经制作了一个图形模型来说明这一点。在初级保健中设计和实施人工智能的整个过程中,社区参与是减轻人工智能潜在负面影响的一个常见建议。结论:人工智能有可能通过多种方式影响卫生不公平现象,包括直接在患者咨询中以及通过变革性系统效应。本文从系统的角度总结了这些影响,并为今后研究负责任的实施提供了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Artificial intelligence and health inequities in primary care: a systematic scoping review and framework.

Objective: Artificial intelligence (AI) will have a significant impact on healthcare over the coming decade. At the same time, health inequity remains one of the biggest challenges. Primary care is both a driver and a mitigator of health inequities and with AI gaining traction in primary care, there is a need for a holistic understanding of how AI affect health inequities, through the act of providing care and through potential system effects. This paper presents a systematic scoping review of the ways AI implementation in primary care may impact health inequity.

Design: Following a systematic scoping review approach, we searched for literature related to AI, health inequity, and implementation challenges of AI in primary care. In addition, articles from primary exploratory searches were added, and through reference screening.The results were thematically summarised and used to produce both a narrative and conceptual model for the mechanisms by which social determinants of health and AI in primary care could interact to either improve or worsen health inequities.Two public advisors were involved in the review process.

Eligibility criteria: Peer-reviewed publications and grey literature in English and Scandinavian languages.

Information sources: PubMed, SCOPUS and JSTOR.

Results: A total of 1529 publications were identified, of which 86 met the inclusion criteria. The findings were summarised under six different domains, covering both positive and negative effects: (1) access, (2) trust, (3) dehumanisation, (4) agency for self-care, (5) algorithmic bias and (6) external effects. The five first domains cover aspects of the interface between the patient and the primary care system, while the last domain covers care system-wide and societal effects of AI in primary care. A graphical model has been produced to illustrate this. Community involvement throughout the whole process of designing and implementing of AI in primary care was a common suggestion to mitigate the potential negative effects of AI.

Conclusion: AI has the potential to affect health inequities through a multitude of ways, both directly in the patient consultation and through transformative system effects. This review summarises these effects from a system tive and provides a base for future research into responsible implementation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Medicine and Community Health (FMCH) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the topics of family medicine, general practice and community health. FMCH strives to be a leading international journal that promotes ‘Health Care for All’ through disseminating novel knowledge and best practices in primary care, family medicine, and community health. FMCH publishes original research, review, methodology, commentary, reflection, and case-study from the lens of population health. FMCH’s Asian Focus section features reports of family medicine development in the Asia-pacific region. FMCH aims to be an exemplary forum for the timely communication of medical knowledge and skills with the goal of promoting improved health care through the practice of family and community-based medicine globally. FMCH aims to serve a diverse audience including researchers, educators, policymakers and leaders of family medicine and community health. We also aim to provide content relevant for researchers working on population health, epidemiology, public policy, disease control and management, preventative medicine and disease burden. FMCH does not impose any article processing charges (APC) or submission charges.
期刊最新文献
fRAP 2.0: a community engagement method applied to cervical cancer disparities among Hispanic women. Survey of international experts on research priorities to improve care for healthy ageing. Global lessons on delivery of primary healthcare services for people with non-communicable diseases: convergent mixed methods. Individual and geospatial factors associated with receipt of colorectal cancer screening: a state-wide mixed-level analysis. Effectiveness of post-COVID-19 primary care attendance in improving survival in very old patients with multimorbidity: a territory-wide target trial emulation
×
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