CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 113Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationEthics and Social Impacts of AIAnatomy and Medical Technology

Attitudes of Patients and Their Relatives Toward Artificial Intelligence in Neurosurgery

Open access
Palmisciano, Paolo, Jamjoom, Aimun A.B., Taylor, Daniel, Stoyanov, Danail, Marcus, Hani J.·2020·World Neurosurgery
DOI 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.03.029
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Artificial intelligence (AI) may favorably support surgeons but can result in concern among patients and their relatives. The aim of this study was to evaluate attitudes of patients and their relatives regarding use of AI in neurosurgery.Methods In a 2-stage cross-sectional survey, a qualitative survey was administered to a focus group of former patients to investigate their perception of AI and its role in neurosurgery. Five themes were identified and used to generate a case-based quantitative survey administered to inpatients and their relatives over a 2-week period. Presented AI platforms were rated appropriate and acceptable using 5-point Likert scales. Demographic data were collected. χ 2 test was used to determine whether demographics influenced participants' attitudes.Results In the first stage, 20 participants responded. Five themes were identified: interpretation of imaging (4/20; 20%), operative planning (5/20; 25%), real-time alert of potential complications (10/20; 50%), partially autonomous surgery (6/20; 30%), and fully autonomous surgery (3/20; 15%). In the second stage, 107 participants responded. Most thought it appropriate and acceptable to use AI for imaging interpretation (76.7%; 66.3%), operative planning (76.7%; 75.8%), real-time alert of potential complications (82.2%; 72.9%), and partially autonomous surgery (58%; 47.7%). Conversely, most did not think that fully autonomous surgery was appropriate (27.1%) or acceptable (17.7%). Demographics did not have a significant influence on perception.Conclusions Most patients and their relatives believed that AI has a role in neurosurgery and found it acceptable. Notable exceptions were fully autonomous systems, with most wanting the neurosurgeon ultimately to remain in control.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.03.029

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The increased anxiety can potentially be attributed to the perception of currently available AI as premature technology.

    “This anxiety can potentially be attributed to the perception of currently available AI as premature technology,26,30–33 which could be addressed by providing more information about its effectiveness and exact application in relation to the AI tool.”

    From Patient perspectives on informed consent for medical AI: A web-based experiment (2024) · cites this paper as [33]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Palmisciano, P., Jamjoom, A. A. B., Taylor, D., Stoyanov, D., & Marcus, H. J.
Affiliations
  • National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB)
  • Western General Hospital (GB)
  • Wellcome / EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (GB)
Corresponding author
Palmisciano, Paolo
ORCID
Venue
World Neurosurgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
138
Pages
e627-e633
ISSN
1878-8750 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.wneu.2020.03.029
OpenAlex
W3012511890
Cited by
113
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4
FWCI
3.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • World Neurosurgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Anatomy and Medical Technology
Keywords
artificial intelligence, neurosurgery, patient attitudes, family members, acceptability, appropriateness, autonomous surgery, surgical planning, medical image interpretation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Artificial Intelligence, Attitude, Cross-Sectional Studies, Family, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Male, Middle Aged, Neurosurgery, Patient Care Planning, Patients, Postoperative Complications, Surveys and Questionnaires, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review