The study, published March 11 in JAMA Network Open, surveyed 1,455 patients between Oct. 31 and Dec. 11, 2023, at Duke University Health System in Durham, N.C. Participants were given multiple surveys to test the impact of response author; disclosure of AI, human or none; and the seriousness of the topic. Patients rated their overall satisfaction, usefulness of information and perceived level of care on a 5-point Likert scale.
Researchers found that patients preferred AI-drafted responses compared with human-drafted responses, with a mean difference of -0.30 points for satisfaction. They also rated the AI-drafted messages higher for usefulness (-0.28) and perceived level of care (-0.43).
After patients were told who wrote the messages, they had a higher satisfaction with the human ones over AI with a mean difference of 0.13 points.
Regardless of author or disclosure type, more than 75% of patients said they were satisfied with the response.
“Patient experience must be considered along with ethical implementation of AI,” the study authors wrote. “Although AI disclosure may slightly reduce satisfaction, disclosure should be maintained to uphold patient autonomy and empowerment.”
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.
