Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Exploring healthcare professionals’ perceptions of artificial intelligence: Validating a questionnaire using the e-Delphi method
56
Zitationen
4
Autoren
2021
Jahr
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to draw upon the collective knowledge of experts in the fields of health and technology to develop a questionnaire that measured healthcare professionals' perceptions of Artificial Intelligence (AI). METHODS: The panel for this study were carefully selected participants who demonstrated an interest and/or involvement in AI from the fields of health or information technology. Recruitment was accomplished via email which invited the panel member to participate and included study and consent information. Data were collected from three rounds in the form of an online survey, an online group meeting and email communication. A 75% median threshold was used to define consensus. RESULTS: Between January and March 2019, five healthcare professionals and three IT experts participated in three rounds of study to reach consensus on the structure and content of the questionnaire. In Round 1 panel members identified issues about general understanding of AI and achieved consensus on nine draft questionnaire items. In Round 2 the panel achieved consensus on demographic questions and comprehensive group discussion resulted in the development of two further questionnaire items for inclusion. In a final e-Delphi round, a draft of the final questionnaire was distributed via email to the panel members for comment. No further amendments were put forward and 100% consensus was achieved. CONCLUSION: A modified e-Delphi method was used to validate and develop a questionnaire to explore healthcare professionals' perceptions of AI. The e-Delphi method was successful in achieving consensus from an interdisciplinary panel of experts from health and IT. Further research is recommended to test the reliability of this questionnaire.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
2021 · 91.427 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
2009 · 83.126 Zit.
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation
2018 · 39.261 Zit.
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
2019 · 29.860 Zit.
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement
2015 · 26.303 Zit.