Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Are medical oncologists ready for the artificial intelligence revolution? Evaluation of the opinions, knowledge, and experiences of medical oncologists about artificial intelligence technologies

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Medical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The use of artificial intelligence technologies (AIT) in medicine is increasing worldwide. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the experiences, opinions, and future expectations of medical oncologists on artificial intelligence (AI). After the reliability and validity analyses were carried out by a pilot study, the main online questionnaire was sent to the members of the “Turkish Society of Medical Oncology” mail group by an invitation e-mail. The anonymized responses of the participants were analyzed. The median age of the 156 participants was 36 (34–43) years and half (51%) were male. Most (45%) were fellows. Forty-six percent were working in university hospitals, 56% were visiting 20–40 patients a day. Medical oncologists’ view of AIT was mostly positive (78%). However, some (especially women) had doubts about the reliability of AI (44%) and the establishment of its ethical/legal basis (49%). Sixty-five percent of the participants had no/superficial knowledge about AI. More than half (55%) had never used AI-based applications in their academic or clinical work. However, unlike now, 80% of the participants believed that they would use AIT frequently in their practice in the future and it would be beneficial. The most anticipated (81%) benefit was real-time information processing and real-time access to big data. Sixty-two percent believed that information about AI should be in the education curriculum. The vast majority of respondents (79%) thought that AI would not completely replace medical oncologists in the future. Some differences were found in the perception and experience of oncologists according to age, gender, title, and the number of patients examined per day. About AI, the general opinion of medical oncologists was positive, but their level of knowledge and use was low. However, they thought they would use it frequently in future and needed training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data of the study can be accessed by contacting ES.

References

  1. Xu Y, Liu X, Cao X, Huang C, Liu E, Qian S, et al. Artificial intelligence: a powerful paradigm for scientific research. Innovation (Camb). 2021;2(4): 100179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mariani MM, Perez-Vega R, Wirtz J. AI in marketing, consumer research and psychology: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Psychol Mark. 2022;39(4):755–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bohr A, Memarzadeh K. The rise of artificial intelligence in healthcare applications. Artif Intell Healthcare. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818438-7.00002-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Shimizu H, Nakayama KI. Artificial intelligence in oncology. Cancer Sci. 2020;111(5):1452–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.14377.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen ZH, Lin L, Wu CF, Li CF, Xu RH, Sun Y. Artificial intelligence for assisting cancer diagnosis and treatment in the era of precision medicine. Cancer Commun (Lond). 2021;41(11):1100–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/cac2.12215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hinton G. Deep learning-a technology with the potential to transform health care. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 2018;320(11):1101–2. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.11100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Yu H, Beam AL, Kohane IS. Artificial intelligence in healthcare. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018;2(10):719–31. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-018-0305-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Blease C, Kaptchuk TJ, Bernstein MH, Mandl KD, Halamka JD, Desroches CM. Artificial intelligence and the future of primary care: exploratory qualitative study of UK general practitioners’ views. J Med Internet Res. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2196/12802.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Oh S, Kim JH, Choi SW, Lee HJ, Hong J, Kwon SH. Physician confidence in artificial intelligence: an online mobile survey. J Med Internet Res. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2196/12422.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Doraiswamy PM, Blease C, Bodner K. Artificial intelligence and the future of psychiatry: ınsights from a global physician survey. Artif Intell Med. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2019.101753.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. van Hoek J, et al. A survey on the future of radiology among radiologists, medical students and surgeons: students and surgeons tend to be more skeptical about artificial intelligence and radiologists may fear that other disciplines take over. Eur J Radiol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108742.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. European Society of Radiology (ESR). Impact of artificial intelligence on radiology: a EuroAIM survey among members of the European Society of Radiology. Insights Imaging. 2019;10(1):105. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0798-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sarwar S, Dent A, Faust K, et al. Physician perspectives on integration of artificial intelligence into diagnostic pathology. npj Digit Med. 2019;2:28. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-019-0106-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Ara Shaikh A, Kumar A, Jani K, Mitra S, García-Tadeo DA, Devarajan A. The role of machine learning and artificial ıntelligence for making a digital classroom and its sustainable ımpact on education during Covid-19. Mater Today Proc. 2022;56:3211–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.09.368.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pecqueux M, et al. The use and future perspective of Artificial Intelligence—a survey among German surgeons. Front Public Health. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.982335.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Scheetz J, Rothschild P, McGuinness M, Hadoux X, Soyer HP, Janda M, et al. A survey of clinicians on the use of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology and radiation oncology. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):5193. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84698-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Shaughnessey J, Collins ML. Radiation therapist perceptions on how artificial intelligence may affect their role and practice. J Med Radiat Sci. 2023;70(S2):6–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.638.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Frank MR, et al. Toward understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on labor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116(14):6531–9. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900949116.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Zheng B, Wu M-n, Zhu S-j, et al. Attitudes of medical workers in China toward artificial intelligence in ophthalmology: a comparative survey. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:1067. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07044-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Gong B, et al. Influence of artificial intelligence on Canadian medical students’ preference for radiology specialty: a national survey study. Acad Radiol. 2019;26(4):566–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2018.10.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Collado-Mesa F, Alvarez E, Arheart K. The role of artificial intelligence in diagnostic radiology: a survey at a single radiology residency training program. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(12):1753–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2017.12.021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kust D, Murgic J, Vukovic P, Kruljac I, Prpic M, Zilic A, et al. Oncologist burnout syndrome in eastern Europe: results of the multinational survey. JCO Oncol Pract. 2020;16(4):e366–76. https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00470.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Coiera E. The fate of medicine in the time of AI. Lancet. 2018;392(10162):2331–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31925-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kohane IS, Drazen JM, Campion EW. A glimpse of the next 100 years in medicine. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(26):2538–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejme1213371.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Beam AL, Kohane IS. Translating artificial intelligence into clinical care. JAMA J Am Med Assoc. 2016;316(22):2368–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.17217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank all professors/associate professors who commented and directed me for the improvement of the questionnaire and all my colleagues who filled out the questionnaire.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Oncology, Kocaeli City Hospital, Tavsantepe mah., 41000, Izmit, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Elif Sahin

Authors
  1. Elif Sahin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All stages of the article were carried out by ES.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elif Sahin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The current study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the local Institutional Ethics Committee (protocol code 2023/5/51, 17.07.23).

Consent to participate

Informed consent was waived. Because this is a study carried out with an online survey. The survey was sent to the members of the “Turkish Society of Medical Oncology” mail group with an invitation e-mail. The participants were informed at the outset of the questionnaire that their participation was voluntary, and they were assured that their responses would remain confidential and not be shared with any third parties. Only those individuals who acknowledged this explanation and clicked on the “I accept” button were granted access to the questionnaire.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 28 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sahin, E. Are medical oncologists ready for the artificial intelligence revolution? Evaluation of the opinions, knowledge, and experiences of medical oncologists about artificial intelligence technologies. Med Oncol 40, 327 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-023-02200-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-023-02200-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation