Scholarlink

This chapter examines perceptions among individuals from Serbia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan regarding the trustworthiness, usefulness, and empathy of medical advice provided by AI models compared to that offered by human doctors. A mixed-methods approach was employed, involving online surveys where 442 participants rated medical advice from three AI models (GPT-4o, Llama 3.1, Gemini Pro 1.5) and a real doctor across three medical scenarios. Participants evaluated each piece of advice on a 7-point Likert scale for trustworthiness, usefulness, and empathy. They indicated whether they believed the advice was generated by AI or provided by a real doctor. Results showed that participants across all three countries rated advice from human doctors significantly higher in trustworthiness, usefulness, and empathy than AI-generated advice. Familiarity with AI technology and trust in AI-generated information was highest in Kazakhstan, correlating with greater acceptance and usage of AI for health queries. Participants exhibited moderate ability to distinguish between AI and human advice, suggesting that AI models are advancing in producing human-like communication. The study concludes that although AI models show promise in generating medical advice, the human elements of trust and empathy remain indispensable in healthcare.

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

Human Doctors Versus AI Models: Advice Perceptions in Serbia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Ljubiša Bojić,
  • Knud Ryom,
  • Miloš Agatonović,
  • Anguelina Popova,
  • Miroslav Ćurčić,
  • Gulzada Zhanzhigitova,
  • Milan Čabarkapa

摘要

This chapter examines perceptions among individuals from Serbia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan regarding the trustworthiness, usefulness, and empathy of medical advice provided by AI models compared to that offered by human doctors. A mixed-methods approach was employed, involving online surveys where 442 participants rated medical advice from three AI models (GPT-4o, Llama 3.1, Gemini Pro 1.5) and a real doctor across three medical scenarios. Participants evaluated each piece of advice on a 7-point Likert scale for trustworthiness, usefulness, and empathy. They indicated whether they believed the advice was generated by AI or provided by a real doctor. Results showed that participants across all three countries rated advice from human doctors significantly higher in trustworthiness, usefulness, and empathy than AI-generated advice. Familiarity with AI technology and trust in AI-generated information was highest in Kazakhstan, correlating with greater acceptance and usage of AI for health queries. Participants exhibited moderate ability to distinguish between AI and human advice, suggesting that AI models are advancing in producing human-like communication. The study concludes that although AI models show promise in generating medical advice, the human elements of trust and empathy remain indispensable in healthcare.