Patient perspectives on the use of artificial intelligence in prostate cancer diagnosis on MRI

被引:0
|
作者
Fransen, Stefan J. [1 ]
Kwee, T. C. [1 ]
Rouw, D. [2 ]
Roest, C. [1 ]
van Lohuizen, Q. Y. [1 ]
Simonis, F. F. J. [3 ]
van Leeuwen, P. J. [4 ]
Heijmink, S. [4 ]
Ongena, Y. P. [5 ]
Haan, M. [5 ]
Yakar, D. [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
[2] Martini Hosp, Groningen, Netherlands
[3] Tech Univ Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
[4] Dutch Canc Inst, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[5] Univ Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
关键词
Patient preference; Artificial intelligence; Questionnaire; Prostate cancer; Magnetic resonance imaging;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-024-11012-y
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objectives This study investigated patients' acceptance of artificial intelligence (AI) for diagnosing prostate cancer (PCa) on MRI scans and the factors influencing their trust in AI diagnoses. Materials and methods A prospective, multicenter study was conducted between January and November 2023. Patients undergoing prostate MRI were surveyed about their opinions on hypothetical AI assessment of their MRI scans. The questionnaire included nine items: four on hypothetical scenarios of combinations between AI and the radiologist, two on trust in the diagnosis, and three on accountability for misdiagnosis. Relationships between the items and independent variables were assessed using multivariate analysis. Results A total of 212 PCa suspicious patients undergoing prostate MRI were included. The majority preferred AI involvement in their PCa diagnosis alongside a radiologist, with 91% agreeing with AI as the primary reader and 79% as the secondary reader. If AI has a high certainty diagnosis, 15% of the respondents would accept it as the sole decision-maker. Autonomous AI outperforming radiologists would be accepted by 52%. Higher educated persons tended to accept AI when it would outperform radiologists (p < 0.05). The respondents indicated that the hospital (76%), radiologist (70%), and program developer (55%) should be held accountable for misdiagnosis. Conclusions Patients favor AI involvement alongside radiologists in PCa diagnosis. Trust in AI diagnosis depends on the patient's education level and the AI performance, with autonomous AI acceptance by a small majority on the condition that AI outperforms a radiologist. Respondents held the hospital, radiologist, and program developers accountable for misdiagnosis in descending order of accountability.
引用
收藏
页码:769 / 775
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Artificial Intelligence Approach in Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: Bibliometric Analysis
    Denysenko, Anastasiia
    Savchenko, Taras
    Dovbysh, Anatolii
    Romaniuk, Anatolii
    Moskalenko, Roman
    GALICIAN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2022, 29 (02)
  • [22] Use of artificial intelligence in skin cancer diagnosis and management
    Wada, Miki
    Ge, ZongYuan
    Gilmore, Stephen J.
    Mar, Victoria J.
    MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA, 2020, 213 (06) : 256 - +
  • [23] Patient Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence in Radiology
    Kitts, Andrea Borondy
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2023, 20 (09) : 863 - 867
  • [24] Patient Perspectives on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: A Scoping Review
    Moy, Sally
    Irannejad, Mona
    Manning, Stephanie Jeanneret
    Farahani, Mehrdad
    Ahmed, Yomna
    Gao, Ellis
    Prabhune, Radhika
    Lorenz, Suzan
    Mirza, Raza
    Klinger, Christopher
    JOURNAL OF PATIENT-CENTERED RESEARCH AND REVIEWS, 2024, 11 (01)
  • [25] Exploring the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics in Prostate Cancer Management
    Arigbede, Olumide
    Amusa, Tope
    Buxbaum, Sarah G.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (09)
  • [26] Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and Gleason grading of prostate cancer: the PANDA challenge
    Bulten, Wouter
    Kartasalo, Kimmo
    Chen, Po-Hsuan Cameron
    Strom, Peter
    Pinckaers, Hans
    Nagpal, Kunal
    Cai, Yuannan
    Steiner, David F.
    van Boven, Hester
    Vink, Robert
    Hulsbergen-van de Kaa, Christina
    van der Laak, Jeroen
    Amin, Mahul B.
    Evans, Andrew J.
    van der Kwast, Theodorus
    Allan, Robert
    Humphrey, Peter A.
    Gronberg, Henrik
    Samaratunga, Hemamali
    Delahunt, Brett
    Tsuzuki, Toyonori
    Hakkinen, Tomi
    Egevad, Lars
    Demkin, Maggie
    Dane, Sohier
    Tan, Fraser
    Valkonen, Masi
    Corrado, Greg S.
    Peng, Lily
    Mermel, Craig H.
    Ruusuvuori, Pekka
    Litjens, Geert
    Eklund, Martin
    NATURE MEDICINE, 2022, 28 (01) : 154 - +
  • [27] Artificial intelligence for diagnosis and Gleason grading of prostate cancer: the PANDA challenge
    Wouter Bulten
    Kimmo Kartasalo
    Po-Hsuan Cameron Chen
    Peter Ström
    Hans Pinckaers
    Kunal Nagpal
    Yuannan Cai
    David F. Steiner
    Hester van Boven
    Robert Vink
    Christina Hulsbergen-van de Kaa
    Jeroen van der Laak
    Mahul B. Amin
    Andrew J. Evans
    Theodorus van der Kwast
    Robert Allan
    Peter A. Humphrey
    Henrik Grönberg
    Hemamali Samaratunga
    Brett Delahunt
    Toyonori Tsuzuki
    Tomi Häkkinen
    Lars Egevad
    Maggie Demkin
    Sohier Dane
    Fraser Tan
    Masi Valkonen
    Greg S. Corrado
    Lily Peng
    Craig H. Mermel
    Pekka Ruusuvuori
    Geert Litjens
    Martin Eklund
    Nature Medicine, 2022, 28 : 154 - 163
  • [28] Patient perspectives of artificial intelligence as a medical device in a skin cancer pathway
    Kawsar, Anusuya
    Hussain, Khawar
    Kalsi, Dilraj
    Kemos, Polychronis
    Marsden, Helen
    Thomas, Lucy
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2023, 10
  • [29] The role of artificial intelligence in MRI-driven active surveillance in prostate cancer
    Nikita Sushentsev
    Tristan Barrett
    Nature Reviews Urology, 2022, 19 : 510 - 510
  • [30] The role of artificial intelligence in MRI-driven active surveillance in prostate cancer
    Sushentsev, Nikita
    Barrett, Tristan
    NATURE REVIEWS UROLOGY, 2022, 19 (08) : 510 - 510