» Articles » PMID: 32159733

Patient Perspectives on the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Skin Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study

Abstract

Importance: The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is expanding throughout the field of medicine. In dermatology, researchers are evaluating the potential for direct-to-patient and clinician decision-support AI tools to classify skin lesions. Although AI is poised to change how patients engage in health care, patient perspectives remain poorly understood.

Objective: To explore how patients conceptualize AI and perceive the use of AI for skin cancer screening.

Design, Setting, And Participants: A qualitative study using a grounded theory approach to semistructured interview analysis was conducted in general dermatology clinics at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and melanoma clinics at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Forty-eight patients were enrolled. Each interview was independently coded by 2 researchers with interrater reliability measurement; reconciled codes were used to assess code frequency. The study was conducted from May 6 to July 8, 2019.

Main Outcomes And Measures: Artificial intelligence concept, perceived benefits and risks of AI, strengths and weaknesses of AI, AI implementation, response to conflict between human and AI clinical decision-making, and recommendation for or against AI.

Results: Of 48 patients enrolled, 26 participants (54%) were women; mean (SD) age was 53.3 (21.7) years. Sixteen patients (33%) had a history of melanoma, 16 patients (33%) had a history of nonmelanoma skin cancer only, and 16 patients (33%) had no history of skin cancer. Twenty-four patients were interviewed about a direct-to-patient AI tool and 24 patients were interviewed about a clinician decision-support AI tool. Interrater reliability ratings for the 2 coding teams were κ = 0.94 and κ = 0.89. Patients primarily conceptualized AI in terms of cognition. Increased diagnostic speed (29 participants [60%]) and health care access (29 [60%]) were the most commonly perceived benefits of AI for skin cancer screening; increased patient anxiety was the most commonly perceived risk (19 [40%]). Patients perceived both more accurate diagnosis (33 [69%]) and less accurate diagnosis (41 [85%]) to be the greatest strength and weakness of AI, respectively. The dominant theme that emerged was the importance of symbiosis between humans and AI (45 [94%]). Seeking biopsy was the most common response to conflict between human and AI clinical decision-making (32 [67%]). Overall, 36 patients (75%) would recommend AI to family members and friends.

Conclusions And Relevance: In this qualitative study, patients appeared to be receptive to the use of AI for skin cancer screening if implemented in a manner that preserves the integrity of the human physician-patient relationship.

Citing Articles

Perspectives of Black, Latinx, Indigenous, and Asian Communities on Health Data Use and AI: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.

Rinderknecht F, Yang V, Tilahun M, Lester J J Med Internet Res. 2025; 27:e50708.

PMID: 39983116 PMC: 11890126. DOI: 10.2196/50708.


Attitudes toward artificial intelligence and robots in healthcare in the general population: a qualitative study.

Smola P, Mlozniak I, Wojcieszko M, Zwierczyk U, Kobryn M, Rzepecka E Front Digit Health. 2025; 7:1458685.

PMID: 39931116 PMC: 11808042. DOI: 10.3389/fdgth.2025.1458685.


Digital healthcare services in community pharmacies in Switzerland: Pharmacist and patient acceptability, and pharmacist readiness-the Pneumoscope™ pilot study.

Backes C, Godot C, Gujer C, Obegi N, Perez A, Gervaix A Digit Health. 2025; 11():20552076241313164.

PMID: 39822303 PMC: 11736744. DOI: 10.1177/20552076241313164.


Patients' attitudes toward artificial intelligence (AI) in cancer care: A scoping review protocol.

Hilbers D, Nekain N, Bates A, Nunez J PLoS One. 2025; 20(1):e0317276.

PMID: 39808641 PMC: 11731723. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317276.


Consumer opinion on the use of machine learning in healthcare settings: A qualitative systematic review.

Stephens J, Northcott C, Poirier B, Lewis T Digit Health. 2025; 11():20552076241288631.

PMID: 39777065 PMC: 11705357. DOI: 10.1177/20552076241288631.


References
1.
Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J. 2008; 204(6):291-5. DOI: 10.1038/bdj.2008.192. View

2.
Zakhem G, Motosko C, Ho R . How Should Artificial Intelligence Screen for Skin Cancer and Deliver Diagnostic Predictions to Patients?. JAMA Dermatol. 2018; 154(12):1383-1384. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.2714. View

3.
Tran V, Riveros C, Ravaud P . Patients' views of wearable devices and AI in healthcare: findings from the ComPaRe e-cohort. NPJ Digit Med. 2019; 2:53. PMC: 6572821. DOI: 10.1038/s41746-019-0132-y. View

4.
Esteva A, Kuprel B, Novoa R, Ko J, Swetter S, Blau H . Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks. Nature. 2017; 542(7639):115-118. PMC: 8382232. DOI: 10.1038/nature21056. View

5.
Adamson A, Smith A . Machine Learning and Health Care Disparities in Dermatology. JAMA Dermatol. 2018; 154(11):1247-1248. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2018.2348. View