Author
Listed:
- Putta Chandana
- Bhavuk Samrat
- Sahil Suri
- Roshni Majumder
- Shashikant Patil
- Prabhat Ku.Sahu
Abstract
Using robots and AI helpers in healthcare is changing how patients communicate with medical services. This could be a good way to improve communication, get patients more involved, and maybe even build trust in healthcare delivery. This research looks at how these digital tools affect how doctors and patients talk to each other and trust each other. The quick spread of AI-powered systems in healthcare settings has led to talks about how well they help build real relationships between healthcare workers and patients and how they can make healthcare more accessible and efficient. The main goal of the study is to look at how patients and healthcare workers feel about AI being used in hospital settings, focussing on how much patients trust and are satisfied with the technology. A mixed-method approach was used, with people from a wide range of groups taking part in both quantitative polls and qualitative conversations. People who used AI-based apps and helpers in healthcare settings, such as to check for symptoms, make appointments, and send follow-up messages, were asked to provide data. The study looks into how these tools affect what patients expect, how happy they are with conversation, and how much they believe AI systems that give them medical advice. The results show that patients have mostly good experiences with AI helpers, especially when it comes to things like ease of use, quick answers, and availability 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Concerns about how artificial intelligence would not be able to provide humane treatment and the requirement of human supervision in medical decision-making surfaced, nevertheless. The research claims that in certain cases artificial intelligence might increase trust and connection; yet, it should be utilised cautiously and that patient care still depends much on human contact. Future research should concentrate on making AI-driven systems in healthcare more accurate, sympathetic, and transparent if we are to fully maximise them.
Suggested Citation
Handle:
RePEc:dbk:medicw:v:3:y:2024:i::p:495:id:495
DOI: 10.56294/mw2024495
Download full text from publisher
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's
web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a
for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dbk:medicw:v:3:y:2024:i::p:495:id:495. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Javier Gonzalez-Argote (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://mw.ageditor.ar/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.