Abstract
There is a wide chasm between what has been shown to be feasible in the application of artificial intelligence to data from the electronic medical record, and what is currently available. The reasons for this are complex and understudied, and vary across technical, ethical and sociocultural domains. This work addresses the gap in the literature for studies that determine the readiness of clinical end-users to adopt such tools and the way in which they are perceived to affect clinical practice itself.
In this study, we present a novel, credible AI system for predicting in-patient deterioration to likely end users. We gauge their readiness to adopt this technology using a modified version of the technology adoption model.
Users are found to be moderately positive towards the potential introduction of this technology in their workflow, although they demonstrate particular concern for the appropriateness of the clinical setting into which it is deployed.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research was supported by a scholarship from the Australian Research Training program.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved as ethics application HREC/15/SVH/403 under the St Vincent's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (SVH reference SVH/259). This approval was granted on the 10th of August, 2016 and is valid until the 2nd of August, 2021.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Raw survey data are not available due to restrictions from the relevant HREC approval.