Patients are open to doctors using AI for more administrative tasks, but they’re less enthusiastic about using it for diagnosing or claims adjudication.

The survey of 3,488 U.S. adults showed that healthcare consumers primarily consider AI effective for low-level tasks, but don’t find it appropriate for clinical decision-making.

About half of respondents think AI could be useful for translating medical jargon for patients, but only if there is a human reviewing the output. Only a quarter think AI can do this without any human input. Similarly, 44% of respondents think AI can effectively orchestrate appointment scheduling if there's a human in the loop.

Ordering prescription refills, ambient scribing and analyzing medical scans are also popular use cases among patients, especially if the AI is monitored by a human.

These are already among the most popular AI use cases in medicine. Data shows more clinicians are adopting tools like ambient scribing, claiming the technology makes their administrative tasks more efficient. Meanwhile, more technology vendors are deploying AI in their appointment scheduling processes, and electronic health record companies are launching AI to help patients understand their medical notes.

But the promise of AI also has its limits, the survey showed.

Four in 10 consumers said AI should not be making diagnoses, even with a human reviewing the output. When considering their interactions with their own doctors, 60% of respondents said they'd be uncomfortable if their provider used AI for a diagnosis.

Notably, 46% of respondents said AI should not be making decisions about insurance claims, even if there is a human in the loop.

Source link