医疗消费者对澳大利亚急诊科人工智能的伦理关注。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Emergency Medicine Australasia Pub Date : 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1111/1742-6723.14449
Sam Freeman PhD, Jonathon Stewart MBBS, MMed(CritCare), Rebecca Kaard, Eden Ouliel, Adrian Goudie MBBS FACEM DDU, Girish Dwivedi MD, PhD, FRACP, Hamed Akhlaghi MD, PhD, FACEM
{"title":"医疗消费者对澳大利亚急诊科人工智能的伦理关注。","authors":"Sam Freeman PhD,&nbsp;Jonathon Stewart MBBS, MMed(CritCare),&nbsp;Rebecca Kaard,&nbsp;Eden Ouliel,&nbsp;Adrian Goudie MBBS FACEM DDU,&nbsp;Girish Dwivedi MD, PhD, FRACP,&nbsp;Hamed Akhlaghi MD, PhD, FACEM","doi":"10.1111/1742-6723.14449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To investigate health consumers' ethical concerns towards the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in EDs.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Qualitative semi-structured interviews with health consumers, recruited via health consumer networks and community groups, interviews conducted between January and August 2022.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>We interviewed 28 health consumers about their perceptions towards the ethical use of AI in EDs. The results discussed in this paper highlight the challenges and barriers for the effective and ethical implementation of AI from the perspective of Australian health consumers. Most health consumers are more likely to support AI health tools in EDs if they continue to be involved in the decision-making process. There is considerably more approval of AI tools that support clinical decision-making, as opposed to replacing it. There is mixed sentiment about the acceptability of AI tools influencing clinical decision-making and judgement. Health consumers are mostly supportive of the use of their data to train and develop AI tools but are concerned with who has access. Addressing bias and discrimination in AI is an important consideration for some health consumers. Robust regulation and governance are critical for health consumers to trust and accept the use of AI.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Health consumers view AI as an emerging technology that they want to see comprehensively regulated to ensure it functions safely and securely with EDs. Without considerations made for the ethical design, implementation and use of AI technologies, health consumer trust and acceptance in the use of these tools will be limited.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11604,"journal":{"name":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1742-6723.14449","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health consumers' ethical concerns towards artificial intelligence in Australian emergency departments\",\"authors\":\"Sam Freeman PhD,&nbsp;Jonathon Stewart MBBS, MMed(CritCare),&nbsp;Rebecca Kaard,&nbsp;Eden Ouliel,&nbsp;Adrian Goudie MBBS FACEM DDU,&nbsp;Girish Dwivedi MD, PhD, FRACP,&nbsp;Hamed Akhlaghi MD, PhD, FACEM\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1742-6723.14449\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>To investigate health consumers' ethical concerns towards the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in EDs.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Qualitative semi-structured interviews with health consumers, recruited via health consumer networks and community groups, interviews conducted between January and August 2022.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>We interviewed 28 health consumers about their perceptions towards the ethical use of AI in EDs. The results discussed in this paper highlight the challenges and barriers for the effective and ethical implementation of AI from the perspective of Australian health consumers. Most health consumers are more likely to support AI health tools in EDs if they continue to be involved in the decision-making process. There is considerably more approval of AI tools that support clinical decision-making, as opposed to replacing it. There is mixed sentiment about the acceptability of AI tools influencing clinical decision-making and judgement. Health consumers are mostly supportive of the use of their data to train and develop AI tools but are concerned with who has access. Addressing bias and discrimination in AI is an important consideration for some health consumers. Robust regulation and governance are critical for health consumers to trust and accept the use of AI.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Health consumers view AI as an emerging technology that they want to see comprehensively regulated to ensure it functions safely and securely with EDs. Without considerations made for the ethical design, implementation and use of AI technologies, health consumer trust and acceptance in the use of these tools will be limited.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Emergency Medicine Australasia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1742-6723.14449\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Emergency Medicine Australasia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1742-6723.14449\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emergency Medicine Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1742-6723.14449","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的调查医疗消费者对在急诊室使用人工智能(AI)的伦理关切:通过健康消费者网络和社区团体招募健康消费者,对其进行半结构化定性访谈,访谈于 2022 年 1 月至 8 月间进行:我们对 28 位健康消费者进行了访谈,了解他们对 ED 中使用人工智能的道德观念。本文讨论的结果强调了从澳大利亚健康消费者的角度来看,有效和合乎道德地实施人工智能所面临的挑战和障碍。如果大多数医疗消费者能够继续参与决策过程,他们就更有可能支持在急诊室使用人工智能医疗工具。支持临床决策而非取代临床决策的人工智能工具得到了更多的认可。对于人工智能工具影响临床决策和判断的可接受性,人们的看法不一。医疗消费者大多支持使用他们的数据来训练和开发人工智能工具,但对谁能使用这些工具表示担忧。解决人工智能中的偏见和歧视是一些健康消费者的重要考虑因素。健全的监管和治理对于健康消费者信任和接受人工智能的使用至关重要:健康消费者认为人工智能是一种新兴技术,他们希望看到对其进行全面监管,以确保其安全可靠地与 ED 一起发挥作用。如果不考虑人工智能技术设计、实施和使用的道德问题,健康消费者对使用这些工具的信任和接受程度将受到限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Health consumers' ethical concerns towards artificial intelligence in Australian emergency departments

Objectives

To investigate health consumers' ethical concerns towards the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in EDs.

Methods

Qualitative semi-structured interviews with health consumers, recruited via health consumer networks and community groups, interviews conducted between January and August 2022.

Results

We interviewed 28 health consumers about their perceptions towards the ethical use of AI in EDs. The results discussed in this paper highlight the challenges and barriers for the effective and ethical implementation of AI from the perspective of Australian health consumers. Most health consumers are more likely to support AI health tools in EDs if they continue to be involved in the decision-making process. There is considerably more approval of AI tools that support clinical decision-making, as opposed to replacing it. There is mixed sentiment about the acceptability of AI tools influencing clinical decision-making and judgement. Health consumers are mostly supportive of the use of their data to train and develop AI tools but are concerned with who has access. Addressing bias and discrimination in AI is an important consideration for some health consumers. Robust regulation and governance are critical for health consumers to trust and accept the use of AI.

Conclusion

Health consumers view AI as an emerging technology that they want to see comprehensively regulated to ensure it functions safely and securely with EDs. Without considerations made for the ethical design, implementation and use of AI technologies, health consumer trust and acceptance in the use of these tools will be limited.

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
Emergency Medicine Australasia
Emergency Medicine Australasia 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
13.00%
发文量
217
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Emergency Medicine Australasia is the official journal of the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine (ACEM) and the Australasian Society for Emergency Medicine (ASEM), and publishes original articles dealing with all aspects of clinical practice, research, education and experiences in emergency medicine. Original articles are published under the following sections: Original Research, Paediatric Emergency Medicine, Disaster Medicine, Education and Training, Ethics, International Emergency Medicine, Management and Quality, Medicolegal Matters, Prehospital Care, Public Health, Rural and Remote Care, Technology, Toxicology and Trauma. Accepted papers become the copyright of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Utility of computed tomography brain scans in intubated patients with overdose. Implementing the electronic HEEADSSS screening tool in a paediatric emergency department. Review article: A primer for clinical researchers in the emergency department: Part XIII. Strategies to engage staff and enhance participant recruitment in emergency department research. Prisoners in the emergency department: Lessons from a recent inquest. Review article: Strategies to improve emergency department care for adults living with disability: A systematic review.
×
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