Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Primary Care : Exploratory Qualitative Study of UK General Practitioners' Views
©Charlotte Blease, Ted J Kaptchuk, Michael H Bernstein, Kenneth D Mandl, John D Halamka, Catherine M DesRoches. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 20.03.2019..
BACKGROUND: The potential for machine learning to disrupt the medical profession is the subject of ongoing debate within biomedical informatics and related fields.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs') opinions about the potential impact of future technology on key tasks in primary care.
METHODS: In June 2018, we conducted a Web-based survey of 720 UK GPs' opinions about the likelihood of future technology to fully replace GPs in performing 6 key primary care tasks, and, if respondents considered replacement for a particular task likely, to estimate how soon the technological capacity might emerge. This study involved qualitative descriptive analysis of written responses ("comments") to an open-ended question in the survey.
RESULTS: Comments were classified into 3 major categories in relation to primary care: (1) limitations of future technology, (2) potential benefits of future technology, and (3) social and ethical concerns. Perceived limitations included the beliefs that communication and empathy are exclusively human competencies; many GPs also considered clinical reasoning and the ability to provide value-based care as necessitating physicians' judgments. Perceived benefits of technology included expectations about improved efficiencies, in particular with respect to the reduction of administrative burdens on physicians. Social and ethical concerns encompassed multiple, divergent themes including the need to train more doctors to overcome workforce shortfalls and misgivings about the acceptability of future technology to patients. However, some GPs believed that the failure to adopt technological innovations could incur harms to both patients and physicians.
CONCLUSIONS: This study presents timely information on physicians' views about the scope of artificial intelligence (AI) in primary care. Overwhelmingly, GPs considered the potential of AI to be limited. These views differ from the predictions of biomedical informaticians. More extensive, stand-alone qualitative work would provide a more in-depth understanding of GPs' views.
| Errataetall: |
CommentIn: Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Jul;69(684):350. - PMID 31249088 |
|---|---|
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2019 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2019 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:21 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of medical Internet research - 21(2019), 3 vom: 20. März, Seite e12802 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Blease, Charlotte [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 10.02.2020 Date Revised 02.05.2023 published: Electronic CommentIn: Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Jul;69(684):350. - PMID 31249088 Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.2196/12802 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM295150807 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM295150807 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225083028.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2019 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.2196/12802 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n0983.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM295150807 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)30892270 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Blease, Charlotte |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Primary Care |b Exploratory Qualitative Study of UK General Practitioners' Views |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2019 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 10.02.2020 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 02.05.2023 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a CommentIn: Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Jul;69(684):350. - PMID 31249088 | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a ©Charlotte Blease, Ted J Kaptchuk, Michael H Bernstein, Kenneth D Mandl, John D Halamka, Catherine M DesRoches. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 20.03.2019. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: The potential for machine learning to disrupt the medical profession is the subject of ongoing debate within biomedical informatics and related fields | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs') opinions about the potential impact of future technology on key tasks in primary care | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: In June 2018, we conducted a Web-based survey of 720 UK GPs' opinions about the likelihood of future technology to fully replace GPs in performing 6 key primary care tasks, and, if respondents considered replacement for a particular task likely, to estimate how soon the technological capacity might emerge. This study involved qualitative descriptive analysis of written responses ("comments") to an open-ended question in the survey | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Comments were classified into 3 major categories in relation to primary care: (1) limitations of future technology, (2) potential benefits of future technology, and (3) social and ethical concerns. Perceived limitations included the beliefs that communication and empathy are exclusively human competencies; many GPs also considered clinical reasoning and the ability to provide value-based care as necessitating physicians' judgments. Perceived benefits of technology included expectations about improved efficiencies, in particular with respect to the reduction of administrative burdens on physicians. Social and ethical concerns encompassed multiple, divergent themes including the need to train more doctors to overcome workforce shortfalls and misgivings about the acceptability of future technology to patients. However, some GPs believed that the failure to adopt technological innovations could incur harms to both patients and physicians | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: This study presents timely information on physicians' views about the scope of artificial intelligence (AI) in primary care. Overwhelmingly, GPs considered the potential of AI to be limited. These views differ from the predictions of biomedical informaticians. More extensive, stand-alone qualitative work would provide a more in-depth understanding of GPs' views | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a artificial intelligence | |
| 650 | 4 | |a attitudes | |
| 650 | 4 | |a future | |
| 650 | 4 | |a general practice | |
| 650 | 4 | |a machine learning | |
| 650 | 4 | |a opinions | |
| 650 | 4 | |a primary care | |
| 650 | 4 | |a qualitative research | |
| 650 | 4 | |a technology | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kaptchuk, Ted J |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bernstein, Michael H |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mandl, Kenneth D |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Halamka, John D |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a DesRoches, Catherine M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of medical Internet research |d 1999 |g 21(2019), 3 vom: 20. März, Seite e12802 |w (DE-627)NLM116127104 |x 1438-8871 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:21 |g year:2019 |g number:3 |g day:20 |g month:03 |g pages:e12802 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/12802 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 21 |j 2019 |e 3 |b 20 |c 03 |h e12802 | ||