Digital Natives' Preferences on Mobile Artificial Intelligence Apps for Skin Cancer Diagnostics: Survey Study

Facilitating public involvement in research about healthcare AI: A scoping review of empirical methods

OBJECTIVE

With the recent increase in research into public views on healthcare artificial intelligence (HCAI), the objective of this review is to examine the methods of empirical studies on public views on HCAI. We map how studies provided participants with information about HCAI, and we examine the extent to which studies framed publics as active contributors to HCAI governance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched 5 academic databases and Google Advanced for empirical studies investigating public views on HCAI. We extracted information including study aims, research instruments, and recommendations.

RESULTS

Sixty-two studies were included. Most were quantitative (N = 42). Most (N = 47) reported providing participants with background information about HCAI. Despite this, studies often reported participants' lack of prior knowledge about HCAI as a limitation. Over three quarters (N = 48) of the studies made recommendations that envisaged public views being used to guide governance of AI.

DISCUSSION

Provision of background information is an important component of facilitating research with publics on HCAI. The high proportion of studies reporting participants' lack of knowledge about HCAI as a limitation reflects the need for more guidance on how information should be presented. A minority of studies adopted technocratic positions that construed publics as passive beneficiaries of AI, rather than as active stakeholders in HCAI design and implementation.

CONCLUSION

This review draws attention to how public roles in HCAI governance are constructed in empirical studies. To facilitate active participation, we recommend that research with publics on HCAI consider methodological designs that expose participants to diverse information sources.

Ethical considerations for artificial intelligence in dermatology: a scoping review

The field of dermatology is experiencing the rapid deployment of artificial intelligence (AI), from mobile applications (apps) for skin cancer detection to large language models like ChatGPT that can answer generalist or specialist questions about skin diagnoses. With these new applications, ethical concerns have emerged. In this scoping review, we aimed to identify the applications of AI to the field of dermatology and to understand their ethical implications. We used a multifaceted search approach, searching PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar for primary literature, following the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews guidance. Our advanced query included terms related to dermatology, AI and ethical considerations. Our search yielded 202 papers. After initial screening, 68 studies were included. Thirty-two were related to clinical image analysis and raised ethical concerns for misdiagnosis, data security, privacy violations and replacement of dermatologist jobs. Seventeen discussed limited skin of colour representation in datasets leading to potential misdiagnosis in the general population. Nine articles about teledermatology raised ethical concerns, including the exacerbation of health disparities, lack of standardized regulations, informed consent for AI use and privacy challenges. Seven addressed inaccuracies in the responses of large language models. Seven examined attitudes toward and trust in AI, with most patients requesting supplemental assessment by a physician to ensure reliability and accountability. Benefits of AI integration into clinical practice include increased patient access, improved clinical decision-making, efficiency and many others. However, safeguards must be put in place to ensure the ethical application of AI.

Comparing preferences for skin cancer screening: AI-enabled app vs dermatologist

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Skin cancer is a major public health issue. While self-examinations and professional screenings are recommended, they are rarely performed. Mobile health (mHealth) apps utilising artificial intelligence (AI) for skin cancer screening offer a potential solution to aid self-examinations; however, their uptake is low. Therefore, the aim of this research was to examine provider and user characteristics influencing people's decisions to seek skin cancer screening performed by a mHealth app or a dermatologist.

METHODS

Two forced-choice conjoint experiments with Nmain = 1591 and Nreplication = 308 participants from the United States were conducted online to investigate preferences for screening providers. In addition to the provider type (mHealth app vs dermatologist), the following provider attributes were manipulated: costs, expertise, privacy policy, and result details. Subsequently, a questionnaire assessed various user characteristics, including demographics, attitudes toward AI technology and medical mistrust.

RESULTS

Outcomes were consistent across the two studies. The provider type was the most influential factor, with the dermatologist being selected more often than the mHealth app. Cost, expertise, and privacy policy also significantly impacted decisions. Demographic subgroup analyses showed rather consistent preference trends across various age, gender, and ethnicity groups. Individuals with greater medical mistrust were more inclined to choose the mHealth app. Trust, accuracy, and quality ratings were higher for the dermatologist, whether selected or not.

CONCLUSION

Our results offer valuable insights for technology developers, healthcare providers, and policymakers, contributing to unlocking the potential of skin cancer screening apps in bridging healthcare gaps in underserved communities.

Patient Perspectives on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: A Scoping Review

Purpose

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology is being rapidly adopted into many different branches of medicine. Although research has started to highlight the impact of AI on health care, the focus on patient perspectives of AI is scarce. This scoping review aimed to explore the literature on adult patients' perspectives on the use of an array of AI technologies in the health care setting for design and deployment.

Methods

This scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). To evaluate patient perspectives, we conducted a comprehensive literature search using eight interdisciplinary electronic databases, including grey literature. Articles published from 2015 to 2022 that focused on patient views regarding AI technology in health care were included. Thematic analysis was performed on the extracted articles.

Results

Of the 10,571 imported studies, 37 articles were included and extracted. From the 33 peer-reviewed and 4 grey literature articles, the following themes on AI emerged: (i) Patient attitudes, (ii) Influences on patient attitudes, (iii) Considerations for design, and (iv) Considerations for use.

Conclusions

Patients are key stakeholders essential to the uptake of AI in health care. The findings indicate that patients' needs and expectations are not fully considered in the application of AI in health care. Therefore, there is a need for patient voices in the development of AI in health care.

Trust in and Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence Applications in Medicine: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI)-powered technologies are being increasingly used in almost all fields, including medicine. However, to successfully implement medical AI applications, ensuring trust and acceptance toward such technologies is crucial for their successful spread and timely adoption worldwide. Although AI applications in medicine provide advantages to the current health care system, there are also various associated challenges regarding, for instance, data privacy, accountability, and equity and fairness, which could hinder medical AI application implementation.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify factors related to trust in and acceptance of novel AI-powered medical technologies and to assess the relevance of those factors among relevant stakeholders.

METHODS

This study used a mixed methods design. First, a rapid review of the existing literature was conducted, aiming to identify various factors related to trust in and acceptance of novel AI applications in medicine. Next, an electronic survey including the rapid review-derived factors was disseminated among key stakeholder groups. Participants (N=22) were asked to assess on a 5-point Likert scale (1=irrelevant to 5=relevant) to what extent they thought the various factors (N=19) were relevant to trust in and acceptance of novel AI applications in medicine.

RESULTS

The rapid review (N=32 papers) yielded 110 factors related to trust and 77 factors related to acceptance toward AI technology in medicine. Closely related factors were assigned to 1 of the 19 overarching umbrella factors, which were further grouped into 4 categories: human-related (ie, the type of institution AI professionals originate from), technology-related (ie, the explainability and transparency of AI application processes and outcomes), ethical and legal (ie, data use transparency), and additional factors (ie, AI applications being environment friendly). The categorized 19 umbrella factors were presented as survey statements, which were evaluated by relevant stakeholders. Survey participants (N=22) represented researchers (n=18, 82%), technology providers (n=5, 23%), hospital staff (n=3, 14%), and policy makers (n=3, 14%). Of the 19 factors, 16 (84%) human-related, technology-related, ethical and legal, and additional factors were considered to be of high relevance to trust in and acceptance of novel AI applications in medicine. The patient's gender, age, and education level were found to be of low relevance (3/19, 16%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study could help the implementers of medical AI applications to understand what drives trust and acceptance toward AI-powered technologies among key stakeholders in medicine. Consequently, this would allow the implementers to identify strategies that facilitate trust in and acceptance of medical AI applications among key stakeholders and potential users.

Adoption of a COVID-19 Contact Tracing App by Czech Youth: Cross-Cultural Replication Study

BACKGROUND

During the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic crisis, the role of digital contact tracing (DCT) intensified. However, the uptake of this technology expectedly differed among age cohorts and national cultures. Various conceptual tools were introduced to strengthen DCT research from a theoretical perspective. However, little has been done to compare theory-supported findings across different cultural contexts and age cohorts.

OBJECTIVE

Building on the original study conducted in Belgium in April 2020 and theoretically underpinned by the Health Belief Model (HBM), this study attempted to confirm the predictors of DCT adoption in a cultural environment different from the original setting, that is, the Czech Republic. In addition, by using brief qualitative evidence, it aimed to shed light on the possible limitations of the HBM in the examined context and to propose certain extensions of the HBM.

METHODS

A Czech version of the original instrument was administered to a convenience sample of young (aged 18-29 y) Czech adults in November 2020. After filtering, 519 valid responses were obtained and included in the quantitative data analysis, which used structural equation modeling and followed the proposed structure of the relationships among the HBM constructs. Furthermore, a qualitative thematic analysis of the free-text answers was conducted to provide additional insights about the model's validity in the given context.

RESULTS

The proposed measurement model exhibited less optimal fit (root mean square error of approximation=0.065, 90% CI 0.060-0.070) than in the original study (root mean square error of approximation=0.036, 90% CI 0.033-0.039). Nevertheless, perceived benefits and perceived barriers were confirmed as the main, statistically significant predictors of DCT uptake, consistent with the original study (β=.60, P<.001 and β=-.39; P<.001, respectively). Differently from the original study, self-efficacy was not a significant predictor in the strict statistical sense (β=.12; P=.003). In addition, qualitative analysis demonstrated that in the given cohort, perceived barriers was the most frequent theme (166/354, 46.9% of total codes). Under this category, psychological fears and concerns was a subtheme, notably diverging from the original operationalization of the perceived barriers construct. In a similar sense, a role for social influence in DCT uptake processes was suggested by some respondents (12/354, 1.7% of total codes). In summary, the quantitative and qualitative results indicated that the proposed quantitative model seemed to be of limited value in the examined context.

CONCLUSIONS

Future studies should focus on reconceptualizing the 2 underperforming constructs (ie, perceived severity and cues to action) by considering the qualitative findings. This study also provided actionable insights for policy makers and app developers to mitigate DCT adoption issues in the event of a future pandemic caused by unknown viral agents.

[The Rise of Artificial Intelligence - High Prediction Accuracy in Early Detection of Pigmented Melanoma]

The incidence of malignant melanoma is increasing worldwide. If detected early, melanoma is highly treatable, so early detection is vital.Skin cancer early detection has improved significantly in recent decades, for example by the introduction of screening in 2008 and dermoscopy. Nevertheless, in particular visual detection of early melanomas remains challenging because they show many morphological overlaps with nevi. Hence, there continues to be a high medical need to further develop methods for early skin cancer detection in order to be able to reliably diagnosemelanomas at a very early stage.Routine diagnostics for melanoma detection include visual whole body inspection, often supplemented by dermoscopy, which can significantly increase the diagnostic accuracy of experienced dermatologists. A procedure that is additionally offered in some practices and clinics is wholebody photography combined with digital dermoscopy for the early detection of malignant melanoma, especially for monitoring high-risk patients.In recent decades, numerous noninvasive adjunctive diagnostic techniques were developed for the examination of suspicious pigmented moles, that may have the potential to allow improved and, in some cases, automated evaluation of these lesions. First, confocal laser microscopy should be mentioned here, as well as electrical impedance spectroscopy, multiphoton laser tomography, multispectral analysis, Raman spectroscopy or optical coherence tomography. These diagnostic techniques usually focus on high sensitivity to avoid malignant melanoma being overlooked. However, this usually implies lower specificity, which may lead to unnecessary excision of benign lesions in screening. Also, some of the procedures are time-consuming and costly, which also limits their applicability in skin cancer screening. In the near future, the use of artificial intelligence might change skin cancer diagnostics in many ways. The most promising approach may be the analysis of routine macroscopic and dermoscopic images by artificial intelligence.For the classification of pigmented skin lesions based on macroscopic and dermoscopic images, artificial intelligence, especially in form of neural networks, has achieved comparable diagnostic accuracies to dermatologists under experimental conditions in numerous studies. In particular, it achieved high accuracies in the binary melanoma/nevus classification task, but it also performed comparably well to dermatologists in multiclass differentiation of various skin diseases. However, proof of the basic applicability and utility of such systems in clinical practice is still pending. Prerequisites that remain to be established to enable translation of such diagnostic systems into dermatological routine are means that allow users to comprehend the system's decisions as well as a uniformly high performance of the algorithms on image data from other hospitals and practices.At present, hints are accumulating that computer-aided diagnosis systems could provide their greatest benefit as assistance systems, since studies indicate that a combination of human and machine achieves the best results. Diagnostic systems based on artificial intelligence are capable of detecting morphological characteristics quickly, quantitatively, objectively and reproducibly, and could thus provide a more objective analytical basis - in addition to medical experience.

Mapping intellectual structures and research hotspots in the application of artificial intelligence in cancer: A bibliometric analysis

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) is more and more widely used in cancer, which is of great help to doctors in diagnosis and treatment. This study aims to summarize the current research hotspots in the Application of Artificial Intelligence in Cancer (AAIC) and to assess the research trends in AAIC.

Methods

Scientific publications for AAIC-related research from 1 January 1998 to 1 July 2022 were obtained from the Web of Science database. The metrics analyses using bibliometrics software included publication, keyword, author, journal, institution, and country. In addition, the blustering analysis on the binary matrix was performed on hot keywords.

Results

The total number of papers in this study is 1592. The last decade of AAIC research has been divided into a slow development phase (2013-2018) and a rapid development phase (2019-2022). An international collaboration centered in the USA is dedicated to the development and application of AAIC. Li J is the most prolific writer in AAIC. Through clustering analysis and high-frequency keyword research, it has been shown that AI plays a significantly important role in the prediction, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of cancer. Classification, diagnosis, carcinogenesis, risk, and validation are developing topics. Eight hotspot fields of AAIC were also identified.

Conclusion

AAIC can benefit cancer patients in diagnosing cancer, assessing the effectiveness of treatment, making a decision, predicting prognosis and saving costs. Future AAIC research may be dedicated to optimizing AI calculation tools, improving accuracy, and promoting AI.

Over-Detection of Melanoma-Suspect Lesions by a CE-Certified Smartphone App: Performance in Comparison to Dermatologists, 2D and 3D Convolutional Neural Networks in a Prospective Data Set of 1204 Pigmented Skin Lesions Involving Patients' Perception

Simple Summary

Early detection and resection of cutaneous melanoma are crucial for a good prognosis. However, visual distinction of early melanomas from benign nevi remains challenging. New artificial intelligence-based approaches for risk stratification of pigmented skin lesions provide screening methods for laypersons with increasing use of smartphone applications (apps). Our study aims to prospectively investigate the diagnostic accuracy of a CE-certified smartphone app, SkinVision^®, in melanoma recognition. Based on classification into three different risk scores, the app provides a recommendation to consult a dermatologist. In addition, both patients’ and dermatologists’ perspectives towards AI-based mobile health apps were evaluated. We observed that the app classified a significantly higher number of lesions as high-risk than dermatologists, which would have led to a clinically harmful number of unnecessary excisions. The diagnostic performance of the app in dichotomous classification of 1204 pigmented skin lesions (risk classification for nevus vs. melanoma) remained below advertised rates with low sensitivity (41.3–83.3%) and specificity (60.0–82.9%). The confidence in the app was low among both patients and dermatologists, and no patient favored an assessment by the app alone. Although smartphone apps are a potential medium for increasing awareness of melanoma screening in the lay population, they should be evaluated for certification with prospective real-world evidence.

Abstract

The exponential increase in algorithm-based mobile health (mHealth) applications (apps) for melanoma screening is a reaction to a growing market. However, the performance of available apps remains to be investigated. In this prospective study, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy of a class 1 CE-certified smartphone app in melanoma risk stratification and its patient and dermatologist satisfaction. Pigmented skin lesions ≥ 3 mm and any suspicious smaller lesions were assessed by the smartphone app SkinVision^® (SkinVision^® B.V., Amsterdam, the Netherlands, App-Version 6.8.1), 2D FotoFinder ATBM^® master (FotoFinder ATBM^® Systems GmbH, Bad Birnbach, Germany, Version 3.3.1.0), 3D Vectra^® WB360 (Canfield Scientific, Parsippany, NJ, USA, Version 4.7.1) total body photography (TBP) devices, and dermatologists. The high-risk score of the smartphone app was compared with the two gold standards: histological diagnosis, or if not available, the combination of dermatologists’, 2D and 3D risk assessments. A total of 1204 lesions among 114 patients (mean age 59 years; 51% females (55 patients at high-risk for developing a melanoma, 59 melanoma patients)) were included. The smartphone app’s sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) varied between 41.3–83.3%, 60.0–82.9%, and 0.62–0.72% according to two study-defined reference standards. Additionally, all patients and dermatologists completed a newly created questionnaire for preference and trust of screening type. The smartphone app was rated as trustworthy by 36% (20/55) of patients at high-risk for melanoma, 49% (29/59) of melanoma patients, and 8.8% (10/114) of dermatologists. Most of the patients rated the 2D TBP imaging (93% (51/55) resp. 88% (52/59)) and the 3D TBP imaging (91% (50/55) resp. 90% (53/59)) as trustworthy. A skin cancer screening by combination of dermatologist and smartphone app was favored by only 1.8% (1/55) resp. 3.4% (2/59) of the patients; no patient preferred an assessment by a smartphone app alone. The diagnostic accuracy in clinical practice was not as reliable as previously advertised and the satisfaction with smartphone apps for melanoma risk stratification was scarce. MHealth apps might be a potential medium to increase awareness for melanoma screening in the lay population, but healthcare professionals and users should be alerted to the potential harm of over-detection and poor performance. In conclusion, we suggest further robust evidence-based evaluation before including market-approved apps in self-examination for public health benefits.

Künstliche Intelligenz auf dem Vormarsch – Hohe Vorhersage-Genauigkeit bei der Früherkennung pigmentierter Melanome

Weltweit steigt die Inzidenz des malignen Melanoms an. Bei frühzeitiger Erkennung ist das Melanom gut behandelbar, eine Früherkennung ist also lebenswichtig.

Die Hautkrebs-Früherkennung hat sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten bspw. durch die Einführung des Screenings im Jahr 2008 und die Dermatoskopie deutlich verbessert. Dennoch bleibt die visuelle Erkennung insbesondere von frühen Melanomen eine Herausforderung, weil diese viele morphologische Überlappungen mit Nävi zeigen. Daher ist der medizinische Bedarf weiterhin hoch, die Methoden zur Hautkrebsfrüherkennung gezielt weiterzuentwickeln, um Melanome bereits in einem sehr frühen Stadium sicher diagnostizieren zu können.

Die Routinediagnostik zur Hautkrebs-Früherkennung umfasst die visuelle Ganzkörperinspektion, oft ergänzt durch die Dermatoskopie, durch die sich die diagnostische Treffsicherheit erfahrener Hautärzte deutlich erhöhen lässt. Ein Verfahren, was in einigen Praxen und Kliniken zusätzlich angeboten wird, ist die kombinierte Ganzkörperfotografie mit der digitalen Dermatoskopie für die Früherkennung maligner Melanome, insbesondere für das Monitoring von Hochrisiko-Patienten.

In den letzten Jahrzenten wurden zahlreiche nicht invasive zusatzdiagnostische Verfahren zur Beurteilung verdächtiger Pigmentmale entwickelt, die das Potenzial haben könnten, eine verbesserte und z. T. automatisierte Bewertung dieser Läsionen zu ermöglichen. In erster Linie ist hier die konfokale Lasermikroskopie zu nennen, ebenso die elektrische Impedanzspektroskopie, die Multiphotonen-Lasertomografie, die Multispektralanalyse, die Raman-Spektroskopie oder die optische Kohärenztomografie. Diese diagnostischen Verfahren fokussieren i. d. R. auf hohe Sensitivität, um zu vermeiden, ein malignes Melanom zu übersehen. Dies bedingt allerdings üblicherweise eine geringere Spezifität, was im Screening zu unnötigen Exzisionen vieler gutartiger Läsionen führen kann. Auch sind einige der Verfahren zeitaufwendig und kostenintensiv, was die Anwendbarkeit im Screening ebenfalls einschränkt.

In naher Zukunft wird insbesondere die Nutzung von künstlicher Intelligenz die Diagnosefindung in vielfältiger Weise verändern. Vielversprechend ist v. a. die Analyse der makroskopischen und dermatoskopischen Routine-Bilder durch künstliche Intelligenz. Für die Klassifizierung von pigmentierten Hautläsionen anhand makroskopischer und dermatoskopischer Bilder erzielte die künstliche Intelligenz v. a. in Form neuronaler Netze unter experimentellen Bedingungen in zahlreichen Studien bereits eine vergleichbare diagnostische Genauigkeit wie Dermatologen. Insbesondere bei der binären Klassifikationsaufgabe Melanom/Nävus erreichte sie hohe Genauigkeiten, doch auch in der Multiklassen-Differenzierung von verschiedenen Hauterkrankungen zeigt sie sich vergleichbar gut wie Dermatologen. Der Nachweis der grundsätzlichen Anwendbarkeit und des Nutzens solcher Systeme in der klinischen Praxis steht jedoch noch aus. Noch zu schaffende Grundvoraussetzungen für die Translation solcher Diagnosesysteme in die dermatologischen Routine sind Möglichkeiten für die Nutzer, die Entscheidungen des Systems nachzuvollziehen, sowie eine gleichbleibend gute Leistung der Algorithmen auf Bilddaten aus fremden Kliniken und Praxen.

Derzeit zeichnet sich ab, dass computergestützte Diagnosesysteme als Assistenzsysteme den größten Nutzen bringen könnten, denn Studien deuten darauf hin, dass eine Kombination von Mensch und Maschine die besten Ergebnisse erzielt. Diagnosesysteme basierend auf künstlicher Intelligenz sind in der Lage, Merkmale schnell, quantitativ, objektiv und reproduzierbar zu erfassen, und könnten somit die Medizin auf eine mathematische Grundlage stellen – zusätzlich zur ärztlichen Erfahrung.

Attitudes and perception of artificial intelligence in healthcare: A cross-sectional survey among patients

Objective

The attitudes about the usage of artificial intelligence in healthcare are controversial. Unlike the perception of healthcare professionals, the attitudes of patients and their companions have been of less interest so far. In this study, we aimed to investigate the perception of artificial intelligence in healthcare among this highly relevant group along with the influence of digital affinity and sociodemographic factors.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study using a paper-based questionnaire with patients and their companions at a German tertiary referral hospital from December 2019 to February 2020. The questionnaire consisted of three sections examining (a) the respondents’ technical affinity, (b) their perception of different aspects of artificial intelligence in healthcare and (c) sociodemographic characteristics.

Results

From a total of 452 participants, more than 90% already read or heard about artificial intelligence, but only 24% reported good or expert knowledge. Asked on their general perception, 53.18% of the respondents rated the use of artificial intelligence in medicine as positive or very positive, but only 4.77% negative or very negative. The respondents denied concerns about artificial intelligence, but strongly agreed that artificial intelligence must be controlled by a physician. Older patients, women, persons with lower education and technical affinity were more cautious on the healthcare-related artificial intelligence usage.

Conclusions

German patients and their companions are open towards the usage of artificial intelligence in healthcare. Although showing only a mediocre knowledge about artificial intelligence, a majority rated artificial intelligence in healthcare as positive. Particularly, patients insist that a physician supervises the artificial intelligence and keeps ultimate responsibility for diagnosis and therapy.