Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Apr 4:13:e54787.
doi: 10.2196/54787.

Understanding Physician's Perspectives on AI in Health Care: Protocol for a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Vignette Study

Affiliations

Understanding Physician's Perspectives on AI in Health Care: Protocol for a Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Vignette Study

Jane Paik Kim et al. JMIR Res Protoc. .

Abstract

Background: As the availability and performance of artificial intelligence (AI)-based clinical decision support (CDS) systems improve, physicians and other care providers poised to be on the front lines will be increasingly tasked with using these tools in patient care and incorporating their outputs into clinical decision-making processes. Vignette studies provide a means to explore emerging hypotheses regarding how context-specific factors, such as clinical risk, the amount of information provided about the AI, and the AI result, may impact physician acceptance and use of AI-based CDS tools. To best anticipate how such factors influence the decision-making of frontline physicians in clinical scenarios involving AI decision-support tools, hypothesis-driven research is needed that enables scenario testing before the implementation and deployment of these tools.

Objective: This study's objectives are to (1) design an original, web-based vignette-based survey that features hypothetical scenarios based on emerging or real-world applications of AI-based CDS systems that will vary systematically by features related to clinical risk, the amount of information provided about the AI, and the AI result; and (2) test and determine causal effects of specific factors on the judgments and perceptions salient to physicians' clinical decision-making.

Methods: US-based physicians with specialties in family or internal medicine will be recruited through email and mail (target n=420). Through a web-based survey, participants will be randomized to a 3-part "sequential multiple assignment randomization trial (SMART) vignette" detailing a hypothetical clinical scenario involving an AI decision support tool. The SMART vignette design is similar to the SMART design but adapted to a survey design. Each respondent will be randomly assigned to 1 of the possible vignette variations of the factors we are testing at each stage, which include the level of clinical risk, the amount of information provided about the AI, and the certainty of the AI output. Respondents will be given questions regarding their hypothetical decision-making in response to the hypothetical scenarios.

Results: The study is currently in progress and data collection is anticipated to be completed in 2024.

Conclusions: The web-based vignette study will provide information on how contextual factors such as clinical risk, the amount of information provided about an AI tool, and the AI result influence physicians' reactions to hypothetical scenarios that are based on emerging applications of AI in frontline health care settings. Our newly proposed "SMART vignette" design offers several benefits not afforded by the extensively used traditional vignette design, due to the 2 aforementioned features. These advantages are (1) increased validity of analyses targeted at understanding the impact of a factor on the decision outcome, given previous outcomes and other contextual factors; and (2) balanced sample sizes across groups. This study will generate a better understanding of physician decision-making within this context.

International registered report identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/54787.

Keywords: AI-based clinical decision support; decision-making; ethics; hypothesis-driven research; hypothetical vignettes; physician perspective; stakeholder attitudes; web-based survey.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study design for the web-based vignette survey featuring sequential randomization. Yellow boxes indicate a randomization point, blue boxes indicate vignette content, and orange boxes indicate responses. Respondents will be physicians in family medicine or internal medicine across the United States. ADHD: attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; AI: artificial intelligence; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Diprose WK, Buist N, Hua N, Thurier Q, Shand G, Robinson R. Physician understanding, explainability, and trust in a hypothetical machine learning risk calculator. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(4):592–600. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz229. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/32106285 5762808 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lambert SI, Madi M, Sopka S, Lenes A, Stange H, Buszello CP, Stephan A. An integrative review on the acceptance of artificial intelligence among healthcare professionals in hospitals. NPJ Digit Med. 2023;6(1):111. doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00852-5. doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00852-5.10.1038/s41746-023-00852-5 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Asan O, Bayrak AE, Choudhury A. Artificial intelligence and human trust in healthcare: focus on clinicians. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22(6):e15154. doi: 10.2196/15154. https://www.jmir.org/2020/6/e15154/ v22i6e15154 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clement J, Ren Y, Curley S. Increasing system transparency about medical AI recommendations may not improve clinical experts‘ decision quality. SSRN Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3961156. Preprint posted online on November 18 2021. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3961156 - DOI
    1. Tucci V, Saary J, Doyle TE. Factors influencing trust in medical artificial intelligence for healthcare professionals: a narrative review. J Med Artif Intell. 2022;5:4–4. doi: 10.21037/jmai-21-25. https://jmai.amegroups.org/article/view/6664/html - DOI