Scholarlink

<p>AI decision support systems can assist clinicians in planning adaptive treatment strategies that can dynamically react to individuals’ cancer progression for effective personalized care. However, AI’s imperfections can lead to suboptimal therapeutics if clinicians over or under rely on AI. To investigate such collaborative decision-making process, we conducted a Human–AI interaction study on response-adaptive radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. We investigated two levels of collaborative behavior: model-agnostic and model-specific; and found that Human–AI interaction is multifactorial and depends on the complex interrelationship between prior knowledge and preferences, patient’s state, disease site, treatment modality, model transparency, and AI’s learned behavior and biases. In summary, some clinicians may disregard AI recommendations due to skepticism; others will critically analyze AI recommendations on a case-by-case basis; clinicians will adjust their decisions if they find AI recommendations beneficial to patients; and clinician will disregard AI recommendations if deemed harmful or suboptimal and seek alternatives.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Intricacies of human–AI interaction in dynamic decision-making for precision oncology

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月29日

查看全文
  • Dipesh Niraula,
  • Kyle C. Cuneo,
  • Ivo D. Dinov,
  • Brian D. Gonzalez,
  • Jamalina B. Jamaluddin,
  • Jionghua Judy Jin,
  • Yi Luo,
  • Martha M. Matuszak,
  • Randall K. Ten Haken,
  • Alex K. Bryant,
  • Thomas J. Dilling,
  • Michael P. Dykstra,
  • Jessica M. Frakes,
  • Casey L. Liveringhouse,
  • Sean R. Miller,
  • Matthew N. Mills,
  • Russell F. Palm,
  • Samuel N. Regan,
  • Anupam Rishi,
  • Javier F. Torres-Roca,
  • Hsiang-Hsuan Michael Yu,
  • Issam El Naqa

摘要

AI decision support systems can assist clinicians in planning adaptive treatment strategies that can dynamically react to individuals’ cancer progression for effective personalized care. However, AI’s imperfections can lead to suboptimal therapeutics if clinicians over or under rely on AI. To investigate such collaborative decision-making process, we conducted a Human–AI interaction study on response-adaptive radiotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. We investigated two levels of collaborative behavior: model-agnostic and model-specific; and found that Human–AI interaction is multifactorial and depends on the complex interrelationship between prior knowledge and preferences, patient’s state, disease site, treatment modality, model transparency, and AI’s learned behavior and biases. In summary, some clinicians may disregard AI recommendations due to skepticism; others will critically analyze AI recommendations on a case-by-case basis; clinicians will adjust their decisions if they find AI recommendations beneficial to patients; and clinician will disregard AI recommendations if deemed harmful or suboptimal and seek alternatives.