Dataset Information

Optometrist's perspectives of Artificial Intelligence in eye care.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in diagnosing and managing ocular disease has gained popularity as research highlights the utilization of AI to improve personalized medicine and healthcare outcomes. The objective of this study is to describe current optometric perspectives of AI in eye care.

Methods

Members of the American Academy of Optometry were sent an electronic invitation to complete a 17-item survey. Survey items assessed perceived advantages and concerns regarding AI using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree."

Results

A total of 400 optometrists completed the survey. The mean number of years since optometry school completion was 25 ± 15.1. Most respondents reported familiarity with AI (66.8%). Though half of optometrists had concerns about the diagnostic accuracy of AI (53.0%), most believed it would improve the practice of optometry (72.0%). Optometrists reported their willingness to incorporate AI into practice increased from 53.3% before the COVID-19 pandemic to 65.5% after onset of the pandemic (p<0.001).

Conclusion

In this study, optometrists are optimistic about the use of AI in eye care, and willingness to incorporate AI in clinical practice also increased after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Scanzera AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9732481 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Optometrist's perspectives of Artificial Intelligence in eye care.

Scanzera Angelica C AC Shorter Ellen E Kinnaird Charles C Valikodath Nita N Al-Khaled Tala T Cole Emily E Kravets Sasha S Hallak Joelle A JA McMahon Timothy T Chan R V Paul RVP

Journal of optometry 20220920

<h4>Purpose</h4>The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in diagnosing and managing ocular disease has gained popularity as research highlights the utilization of AI to improve personalized medicine and healthcare outcomes. The objective of this study is to describe current optometric perspectives of AI in eye care.<h4>Methods</h4>Members of the American Academy of Optometry were sent an electronic invitation to complete a 17-item survey. Survey items assessed perceived advantages and con ...[more]

PMID: 36137899

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceArtificial intelligence (AI) tools are rapidly integrating into cancer care. Understanding stakeholder views on ethical issues associated with the implementation of AI in oncology is critical to optimal deployment.ObjectiveTo evaluate oncologists' views on the ethical domains of the use of AI in clinical care, including familiarity, predictions, explainability (the ability to explain how a result was determined), bias, deference, and responsibilities.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional, population-based survey study was conducted from November 15, 2022, to July 31, 2023, among 204 US-based oncologists identified using the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was response to a question asking whether participants agreed or disagreed that patients need to provide informed consent for AI model use during cancer treatment decisions.ResultsOf 387 surveys, 204 were completed (response rate, 52.7%). Participants represented 37 states, 120 (63.7%) identified as male, 128 (62.7%) as non-Hispanic White, and 60 (29.4%) were from academic practices; 95 (46.6%) had received some education on AI use in health care, and 45.3% (92 of 203) reported familiarity with clinical decision models. Most participants (84.8% [173 of 204]) reported that AI-based clinical decision models needed to be explainable by oncologists to be used in the clinic; 23.0% (47 of 204) stated they also needed to be explainable by patients. Patient consent for AI model use during treatment decisions was supported by 81.4% of participants (166 of 204). When presented with a scenario in which an AI decision model selected a different treatment regimen than the oncologist planned to recommend, the most common response was to present both options and let the patient decide (36.8% [75 of 204]); respondents from academic settings were more likely than those from other settings to let the patient decide (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.19-5.51). Most respondents (90.7% [185 of 204]) reported that AI developers were responsible for the medico-legal problems associated with AI use. Some agreed that this responsibility was shared by physicians (47.1% [96 of 204]) or hospitals (43.1% [88 of 204]). Finally, most respondents (76.5% [156 of 204]) agreed that oncologists should protect patients from biased AI tools, but only 27.9% (57 of 204) were confident in their ability to identify poorly representative AI models.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional survey study, few oncologists reported that patients needed to understand AI models, but most agreed that patients should consent to their use, and many tasked patients with choosing between physician- and AI-recommended treatment regimens. These findings suggest that the implementation of AI in oncology must include rigorous assessments of its effect on care decisions as well as decisional responsibility when problems related to AI use arise.

Project description:ImportanceUnderstanding the views and values of patients is of substantial importance to developing the ethical parameters of artificial intelligence (AI) use in medicine. Thus far, there is limited study on the views of children and youths. Their perspectives contribute meaningfully to the integration of AI in medicine.ObjectiveTo explore the moral attitudes and views of children and youths regarding research and clinical care involving health AI at the point of care.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study recruited participants younger than 18 years during a 1-year period (October 2021 to March 2022) at a large urban pediatric hospital. A total of 44 individuals who were receiving or had previously received care at a hospital or rehabilitation clinic contacted the research team, but 15 were found to be ineligible. Of the 29 who consented to participate, 1 was lost to follow-up, resulting in 28 participants who completed the interview.ExposuresParticipants were interviewed using vignettes on 3 main themes: (1) health data research, (2) clinical AI trials, and (3) clinical use of AI.Main outcomes and measuresThematic description of values surrounding health data research, interventional AI research, and clinical use of AI.ResultsThe 28 participants included 6 children (ages, 10-12 years) and 22 youths (ages, 13-17 years) (16 female, 10 male, and 3 trans/nonbinary/gender diverse). Mean (SD) age was 15 (2) years. Participants were highly engaged and quite knowledgeable about AI. They expressed a positive view of research intended to help others and had strong feelings about the uses of their health data for AI. Participants expressed appreciation for the vulnerability of potential participants in interventional AI trials and reinforced the importance of respect for their preferences regardless of their decisional capacity. A strong theme for the prospective use of clinical AI was the desire to maintain bedside interaction between the patient and their physician.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, children and youths reported generally positive views of AI, expressing strong interest and advocacy for their involvement in AI research and inclusion of their voices for shared decision-making with AI in clinical care. These findings suggest the need for more engagement of children and youths in health care AI research and integration.

Project description:BackgroundMany artificial intelligence (AI) studies have focused on development of AI models, novel techniques, and reporting guidelines. However, little is understood about clinicians' perspectives of AI applications in medical fields including ophthalmology, particularly in light of recent regulatory guidelines. The aim for this study was to evaluate the perspectives of ophthalmologists regarding AI in 4 major eye conditions: diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and cataract.MethodsThis was a multi-national survey of ophthalmologists between March 1st, 2020 to February 29th, 2021 disseminated via the major global ophthalmology societies. The survey was designed based on microsystem, mesosystem and macrosystem questions, and the software as a medical device (SaMD) regulatory framework chaired by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Factors associated with AI adoption for ophthalmology analyzed with multivariable logistic regression random forest machine learning.ResultsOne thousand one hundred seventy-six ophthalmologists from 70 countries participated with a response rate ranging from 78.8 to 85.8% per question. Ophthalmologists were more willing to use AI as clinical assistive tools (88.1%, n = 890/1,010) especially those with over 20 years' experience (OR 3.70, 95% CI: 1.10-12.5, p = 0.035), as compared to clinical decision support tools (78.8%, n = 796/1,010) or diagnostic tools (64.5%, n = 651). A majority of Ophthalmologists felt that AI is most relevant to DR (78.2%), followed by glaucoma (70.7%), AMD (66.8%), and cataract (51.4%) detection. Many participants were confident their roles will not be replaced (68.2%, n = 632/927), and felt COVID-19 catalyzed willingness to adopt AI (80.9%, n = 750/927). Common barriers to implementation include medical liability from errors (72.5%, n = 672/927) whereas enablers include improving access (94.5%, n = 876/927). Machine learning modeling predicted acceptance from participant demographics with moderate to high accuracy, and area under the receiver operating curves of 0.63-0.83.ConclusionOphthalmologists are receptive to adopting AI as assistive tools for DR, glaucoma, and AMD. Furthermore, ML is a useful method that can be applied to evaluate predictive factors on clinical qualitative questionnaires. This study outlines actionable insights for future research and facilitation interventions to drive adoption and operationalization of AI tools for Ophthalmology.

Dataset Information

Optometrist's perspectives of Artificial Intelligence in eye care.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Optometrist's perspectives of Artificial Intelligence in eye care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets