A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology
Abstract Artificial intelligence technology has advanced rapidly in recent years and has the potential to improve healthcare outcomes. However, technology uptake will be largely driven by clinicians, and there is a paucity of data regarding the attitude that clinicians have to this new technology. I...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Nature Portfolio
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/c0dd39a13e2049d68ce2c943b58bb2f8 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| id |
oai:doaj.org-article:c0dd39a13e2049d68ce2c943b58bb2f8 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:c0dd39a13e2049d68ce2c943b58bb2f82021-12-02T13:35:03ZA survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology10.1038/s41598-021-84698-52045-2322https://doaj.org/article/c0dd39a13e2049d68ce2c943b58bb2f82021-03-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84698-5https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Artificial intelligence technology has advanced rapidly in recent years and has the potential to improve healthcare outcomes. However, technology uptake will be largely driven by clinicians, and there is a paucity of data regarding the attitude that clinicians have to this new technology. In June–August 2019 we conducted an online survey of fellows and trainees of three specialty colleges (ophthalmology, radiology/radiation oncology, dermatology) in Australia and New Zealand on artificial intelligence. There were 632 complete responses (n = 305, 230, and 97, respectively), equating to a response rate of 20.4%, 5.1%, and 13.2% for the above colleges, respectively. The majority (n = 449, 71.0%) believed artificial intelligence would improve their field of medicine, and that medical workforce needs would be impacted by the technology within the next decade (n = 542, 85.8%). Improved disease screening and streamlining of monotonous tasks were identified as key benefits of artificial intelligence. The divestment of healthcare to technology companies and medical liability implications were the greatest concerns. Education was identified as a priority to prepare clinicians for the implementation of artificial intelligence in healthcare. This survey highlights parallels between the perceptions of different clinician groups in Australia and New Zealand about artificial intelligence in medicine. Artificial intelligence was recognized as valuable technology that will have wide-ranging impacts on healthcare.Jane ScheetzPhilip RothschildMyra McGuinnessXavier HadouxH. Peter SoyerMonika JandaJames J.J. CondonLuke Oakden-RaynerLyle J. PalmerStuart KeelPeter van WijngaardenNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2021) |
| institution |
DOAJ |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
EN |
| topic |
Medicine R Science Q |
| spellingShingle |
Medicine R Science Q Jane Scheetz Philip Rothschild Myra McGuinness Xavier Hadoux H. Peter Soyer Monika Janda James J.J. Condon Luke Oakden-Rayner Lyle J. Palmer Stuart Keel Peter van Wijngaarden A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| description |
Abstract Artificial intelligence technology has advanced rapidly in recent years and has the potential to improve healthcare outcomes. However, technology uptake will be largely driven by clinicians, and there is a paucity of data regarding the attitude that clinicians have to this new technology. In June–August 2019 we conducted an online survey of fellows and trainees of three specialty colleges (ophthalmology, radiology/radiation oncology, dermatology) in Australia and New Zealand on artificial intelligence. There were 632 complete responses (n = 305, 230, and 97, respectively), equating to a response rate of 20.4%, 5.1%, and 13.2% for the above colleges, respectively. The majority (n = 449, 71.0%) believed artificial intelligence would improve their field of medicine, and that medical workforce needs would be impacted by the technology within the next decade (n = 542, 85.8%). Improved disease screening and streamlining of monotonous tasks were identified as key benefits of artificial intelligence. The divestment of healthcare to technology companies and medical liability implications were the greatest concerns. Education was identified as a priority to prepare clinicians for the implementation of artificial intelligence in healthcare. This survey highlights parallels between the perceptions of different clinician groups in Australia and New Zealand about artificial intelligence in medicine. Artificial intelligence was recognized as valuable technology that will have wide-ranging impacts on healthcare. |
| format |
article |
| author |
Jane Scheetz Philip Rothschild Myra McGuinness Xavier Hadoux H. Peter Soyer Monika Janda James J.J. Condon Luke Oakden-Rayner Lyle J. Palmer Stuart Keel Peter van Wijngaarden |
| author_facet |
Jane Scheetz Philip Rothschild Myra McGuinness Xavier Hadoux H. Peter Soyer Monika Janda James J.J. Condon Luke Oakden-Rayner Lyle J. Palmer Stuart Keel Peter van Wijngaarden |
| author_sort |
Jane Scheetz |
| title |
A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| title_short |
A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| title_full |
A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| title_fullStr |
A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| title_full_unstemmed |
A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| title_sort |
survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology |
| publisher |
Nature Portfolio |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| url |
https://doaj.org/article/c0dd39a13e2049d68ce2c943b58bb2f8 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT janescheetz asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT philiprothschild asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT myramcguinness asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT xavierhadoux asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT hpetersoyer asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT monikajanda asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT jamesjjcondon asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT lukeoakdenrayner asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT lylejpalmer asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT stuartkeel asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT petervanwijngaarden asurveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT janescheetz surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT philiprothschild surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT myramcguinness surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT xavierhadoux surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT hpetersoyer surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT monikajanda surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT jamesjjcondon surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT lukeoakdenrayner surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT lylejpalmer surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT stuartkeel surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology AT petervanwijngaarden surveyofcliniciansontheuseofartificialintelligenceinophthalmologydermatologyradiologyandradiationoncology |
| _version_ |
1718392698459652096 |