Public perceptions of AI-driven decision-making in healthcare: A structural equation modeling approach

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.18884v1
• Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2026 09:14:00 GMT
• Title: Public perceptions of AI-driven decision-making in healthcare: A structural equation modeling approach
• Abstract summary: 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.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into healthcare to support diagnostics, decision-making, and administrative processes. However, the successful implementation of AI depends not only on technical performance but also on public perceptions of its helpfulness, riskiness, and fairness. This study examines public perceptions of automated decision-making (ADM) in healthcare. Data were drawn from the first wave of an ongoing longitudinal survey panel. The final sample consisted of 3,915 respondents and was analyzed with structural equation modeling. Perceptions of ADM in healthcare as helpful, risky, and fair were treated as the dependent variables. AI literacy, familiarity with different forms of AI, confidence in clinicians' ability to distinguish AI- from human-generated content, use of conversational agents for health information, and use of traditional digital health information sources were included as exogenous. Greater familiarity with different forms of AI, higher confidence in the clinician's ability to recognize AI-generated content, and use of conversational agents for health information were associated with greater perceived helpfulness. Use of conversational agents was associated with lower perceived risk, whereas greater familiarity with AI and greater reliance on traditional health information sources were associated with higher perceived risk. Perceptions of ADM as fair were most strongly predicted by confidence in the clinician's ability, with additional small positive associations with AI familiarity, AI literacy, and use of conversational agents. Public perceptions of ADM in healthcare are shaped by technological familiarity, use of conversational agents, and confidence in human oversight. Overall, ADM's perceived helpfulness and fairness are driven more by trust in healthcare professionals than by trust in the technology itself.

Related papers

• Consumer Attitudes Towards AI in Digital Health: A Mixed-Methods Survey in Australia [13.717970454143632]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-30T11:35:36Z)
• Explainable AI as a Double-Edged Sword in Dermatology: The Impact on Clinicians versus The Public [46.86429592892395]
  explainable AI (XAI) addresses this by providing AI decision-making insight.<n>We present results from two large-scale experiments combining a fairness-based diagnosis AI model and different XAI explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-14T00:06:06Z)
• Artificial Intelligence-Driven Clinical Decision Support Systems [5.010570270212569]
  The chapter emphasizes that creating trustworthy AI systems in healthcare requires careful consideration of fairness, explainability, and privacy.<n>The challenge of ensuring equitable healthcare delivery through AI is stressed, discussing methods to identify and mitigate bias in clinical predictive models.<n>The discussion advances in an analysis of privacy vulnerabilities in medical AI systems, from data leakage in deep learning models to sophisticated attacks against model explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-16T16:17:39Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Leveraging Generative AI for Clinical Evidence Summarization Needs to Ensure Trustworthiness [47.51360338851017]
  Evidence-based medicine promises to improve the quality of healthcare by empowering medical decisions and practices with the best available evidence. The rapid growth of medical evidence, which can be obtained from various sources, poses a challenge in collecting, appraising, and synthesizing the evidential information. Recent advancements in generative AI, exemplified by large language models, hold promise in facilitating the arduous task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-19T03:29:45Z)
• FUTURE-AI: International consensus guideline for trustworthy and deployable artificial intelligence in healthcare [73.78776682247187]
  Concerns have been raised about the technical, clinical, ethical and legal risks associated with medical AI. This work describes the FUTURE-AI guideline as the first international consensus framework for guiding the development and deployment of trustworthy AI tools in healthcare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-11T10:49:05Z)
• 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)
• Explainable AI meets Healthcare: A Study on Heart Disease Dataset [0.0]
  The aim is to enlighten practitioners on the understandability and interpretability of explainable AI systems using a variety of techniques. Our paper contains examples based on the heart disease dataset and elucidates on how the explainability techniques should be preferred to create trustworthiness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-06T05:18:43Z)
• Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Making [53.62514158534574]
  We study whether features that reveal case-specific model information can calibrate trust and improve the joint performance of the human and AI. We show that confidence score can help calibrate people's trust in an AI model, but trust calibration alone is not sufficient to improve AI-assisted decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-07T15:33:48Z)

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.