Previously submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research (no longer under consideration since Nov 03, 2024)
Date Submitted: Aug 13, 2024
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 15, 2024 - Oct 10, 2024
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Mixed Methods Survey of UK General Practitioners
ABSTRACT
Background:
Since November 2022, with the debut of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, there has been growing interest in the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI), including in healthcare. However, there is only limited research into doctors’ adoption of these tools and their opinions about their application in clinical practice.
Objective:
This study aimed to explore the opinions of general practitioners (GPs) in the United Kingdom (UK) about the use of generative AI tools (ChatGPT/Bard/Bing AI) in primary care.
Methods:
Between February 2nd-24th 2024, using a convenience sample, we administered a web-based mixed methods survey of 1000 GPs in the UK to explore their experiences and opinions about the impact of generative AI on clinical practice. Participants were recruited from registered GPs currently working in the UK using the clinician marketing service Doctors.net.uk. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and nonparametric tests. We used thematic content analysis to investigate free-text responses and conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of written responses (“comments”) to 2 open-ended questions embedded in the web-based questionnaire.
Results:
A total of 1006 GPs responded, with 53% being male and 54% aged 46 years and older. Most GPs (80%) expressed a need for more support and training in understanding these tools. GPs at least somewhat agreed AI would improve documentation (59%), patient information gathering (56%), treatment plans (41%), diagnostic accuracy (40%), and prognostic accuracy (38%). Additionally, 62% believed patients might rely more on AI, 55% felt it could increase inequities, and 54% saw potential for patient harm, but 47% believed it would enhance healthcare efficiency. GPs who used these tools were significantly more optimistic about the scope for generative AI in improving clinical tasks compared with those who did not report using them. Elaborating on the quantitative component of the survey, 31% (307/1006) left comments that were classified into 4 major themes in relation to generative AI in medicine: (1) lack of familiarity and understanding, (2) a role in clinical practice, (3) concerns, and (4) thoughts on future of healthcare.
Conclusions:
This study highlights UK GPs' perspectives on generative AI in clinical practice, emphasizing the need for more training. Many GPs reported a lack of knowledge and experience with this technology and a significant proportion used non-medical grade technology for clinical tasks, with the risks that this entails. Medical organizations must urgently invest in educating and guiding physicians on AI use and limitations.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.