[论文解读] Understanding how the use of AI decision support tools affect critical thinking and over-reliance on technology by drug dispensers in Tanzania

Ally Salim, Megan Allen+3 more|arXiv (Cornell University)|Feb 19, 2023

Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education被引用 9

一句话总结

该研究调查坦桑尼亚药剂师在确定鉴别诊断时如何依赖AI决策支持工具，包括将AI描述为永远正确且不提供解释的情形。

ABSTRACT

The use of AI in healthcare is designed to improve care delivery and augment the decisions of providers to enhance patient outcomes. When deployed in clinical settings, the interaction between providers and AI is a critical component for measuring and understanding the effectiveness of these digital tools on broader health outcomes. Even in cases where AI algorithms have high diagnostic accuracy, healthcare providers often still rely on their experience and sometimes gut feeling to make a final decision. Other times, providers rely unquestioningly on the outputs of the AI models, which leads to a concern about over-reliance on the technology. The purpose of this research was to understand how reliant drug shop dispensers were on AI-powered technologies when determining a differential diagnosis for a presented clinical case vignette. We explored how the drug dispensers responded to technology that is framed as always correct in an attempt to measure whether they begin to rely on it without any critical thought of their own. We found that dispensers relied on the decision made by the AI 25 percent of the time, even when the AI provided no explanation for its decision.

研究动机与目标

• 理解AI决策支持工具如何影响医疗环境中的批判性思维。
• 考察药剂师在进行鉴别诊断时对AI输出的依赖倾向。
• 评估将AI描述为始终正确对用户依赖与批判性思维的影响。

提出的方法

• 使用带有临床病例小组的鉴别诊断任务来衡量对AI的依赖。
• 将AI描述为始终正确以测试对批判性思维和过度依赖的影响。
• 量化药剂师在没有解释的情况下依赖AI输出的病例比例。

实验结果

研究问题

• RQ1 药剂师在为临床情景的鉴别诊断时是否依赖AI建议？
• RQ2 将AI描述为始终正确是否会增加依赖并降低药剂师的批判性思维？
• RQ3 坦桑尼亚药剂师对AI输出的过度依赖程度有多大？

主要发现

• 药剂师在AI决策上的依赖率为25%。
• 即使AI对其决策没有给出解释，也出现了依赖。
• 该研究考察在资源有限的环境中不加质疑地接受AI输出的风险。