Consumer Attitudes Towards AI in Digital Health: A Mixed-Methods Survey in Australia

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.27744v1
• Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2026 11:35:36 GMT
• Title: Consumer Attitudes Towards AI in Digital Health: A Mixed-Methods Survey in Australia
• Abstract summary: We report a mixed-methods survey study in Australia examining consumer readiness, acceptance, trust, and risk perceptions of healthcare AI.<n> participants expressed moderate optimism and strong perceived usefulness and ease of use, but also substantial concerns about accuracy, safety, and data use.<n>Findings show that consumers judge AI through concrete communication quality and visible human governance.
• Score: 13.717970454143632
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: AI applications are increasingly being introduced into digital health. While technical performance has advanced rapidly, successful deployment mainly depends on consumer attitudes, especially to patient-facing applications. However, most existing research examines consumer attitudes towards healthcare AI at an abstract level rather than in response to concrete artefacts. We report a mixed-methods survey study in Australia (N=275) examining consumer readiness, acceptance, trust, and risk perceptions of healthcare AI, combined with a scenario-based evaluation of an AI-generated versus clinician-written consultation summary. Participants expressed moderate optimism and strong perceived usefulness and ease of use, but also substantial concerns about accuracy, safety, and data use. In the scenario task, the AI-generated summary was strongly preferred for quality, empathy, and overall usefulness, yet identification of the AI summary was near chance. Findings show that consumers judge AI through concrete communication quality and visible human governance, underscoring the need for clinically supervised deployment frameworks beyond technical performance alone.

Related papers

• Public perceptions of AI-driven decision-making in healthcare: A structural equation modeling approach [0.0]
  Successful implementation of AI depends not only on technical performance but also on public perceptions of its helpfulness, riskiness, and fairness.<n>This study examines public perceptions of automated decision-making (ADM) in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-21T09:14:00Z)
• Responsible Evaluation of AI for Mental Health [72.85175110624736]
  Current approaches to evaluating AI tools in mental health care are fragmented and poorly aligned with clinical practice, social context, and first-hand user experience.<n>This paper argues for a rethinking of responsible evaluation by introducing an interdisciplinary framework that integrates clinical soundness, social context, and equity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T12:55:10Z)
• The AI Imperative: Scaling High-Quality Peer Review in Machine Learning [49.87236114682497]
  We argue that AI-assisted peer review must become an urgent research and infrastructure priority.<n>We propose specific roles for AI in enhancing factual verification, guiding reviewer performance, assisting authors in quality improvement, and supporting ACs in decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T18:37:14Z)
• Over-Relying on Reliance: Towards Realistic Evaluations of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support [12.247046469627554]
  We advocate for moving beyond evaluation metrics like Trust, Reliance, Acceptance, and Performance on the AI's task.<n>We call on the community to prioritize ecologically valid, domain-appropriate study setups that measure the emergent forms of value that AI can bring to healthcare professionals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T03:28:56Z)
• Towards Next-Generation Medical Agent: How o1 is Reshaping Decision-Making in Medical Scenarios [46.729092855387165]
  We study the choice of the backbone LLM for medical AI agents, which is the foundation for the agent's overall reasoning and action generation.<n>Our findings demonstrate o1's ability to enhance diagnostic accuracy and consistency, paving the way for smarter, more responsive AI tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-16T18:19:53Z)
• How Performance Pressure Influences AI-Assisted Decision Making [52.997197698288936]
  We show how pressure and explainable AI (XAI) techniques interact with AI advice-taking behavior.<n>Our results show complex interaction effects, with different combinations of pressure and XAI techniques either improving or worsening AI advice taking behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T22:39:52Z)
• Nteasee: Understanding Needs in AI for Health in Africa -- A Mixed-Methods Study of Expert and General Population Perspectives [5.554587779732823]
  We conduct a qualitative study to investigate the best practices, fairness indicators, and potential biases to mitigate when deploying AI for health in Africa.<n>We use a mixed methods approach combining in-depth interviews (IDIs) and surveys.<n>We administer a blinded 30-minute survey with case studies to 672 general population participants across 5 countries in Africa.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T13:56:49Z)
• Explainable AI Enhances Glaucoma Referrals, Yet the Human-AI Team Still Falls Short of the AI Alone [6.740852152639975]
  We investigate how various AI explanations help providers distinguish between patients needing immediate or non-urgent specialist referrals. We built explainable AI algorithms to predict glaucoma surgery needs from routine eyecare data as a proxy for identifying high-risk patients. We incorporated intrinsic and post-hoc explainability and conducted an online study with optometrists to assess human-AI team performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T03:01:20Z)
• Emotional Intelligence Through Artificial Intelligence : NLP and Deep Learning in the Analysis of Healthcare Texts [1.9374282535132377]
  This manuscript presents a methodical examination of the utilization of Artificial Intelligence in the assessment of emotions in texts related to healthcare. We scrutinize numerous research studies that employ AI to augment sentiment analysis, categorize emotions, and forecast patient outcomes. There persist challenges, which encompass ensuring the ethical application of AI, safeguarding patient confidentiality, and addressing potential biases in algorithmic procedures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-14T15:58:13Z)
• Understanding how the use of AI decision support tools affect critical thinking and over-reliance on technology by drug dispensers in Tanzania [0.0]
  Drug shop dispensers were on AI-powered technologies when determining a differential diagnosis for a presented clinical case vignette. We found that dispensers relied on the decision made by the AI 25 percent of the time, even when the AI provided no explanation for its decision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-19T05:59:06Z)
• The Role of AI in Drug Discovery: Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies [97.5153823429076]
  The benefits, challenges and drawbacks of AI in this field are reviewed. The use of data augmentation, explainable AI, and the integration of AI with traditional experimental methods are also discussed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-08T23:23:39Z)
• What Do End-Users Really Want? Investigation of Human-Centered XAI for Mobile Health Apps [69.53730499849023]
  We present a user-centered persona concept to evaluate explainable AI (XAI) Results show that users' demographics and personality, as well as the type of explanation, impact explanation preferences. Our insights bring an interactive, human-centered XAI closer to practical application.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-07T12:51:27Z)
• Towards the Use of Saliency Maps for Explaining Low-Quality Electrocardiograms to End Users [51.644376281196394]
  When using medical images for diagnosis, it is important that the images are of high quality.<n>In telemedicine, a common problem is that the quality issue is only flagged once the patient has left the clinic, meaning they must return in order to have the exam redone.<n>This paper reports on the development of an AI system for flagging and explaining low-quality medical images in real-time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-06T14:53:26Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.