Abstract:Background: It is believed that artificial intelligence (AI) will be an integral part of health care services in the near future and will be incorporated into several aspects of clinical care such as prognosis, diagnostics, and care planning. Thus, many technology companies have invested in producing AI clinical applications. Patients are one of the most important beneficiaries who potentially interact with these technologies and applications; thus, patients' perceptions may affect the widespread use of clinical AI. Patients should be ensured that AI clinical applications will not harm them, and that they will instead benefit from using AI technology for health care purposes. Although human-AI interaction can enhance health care outcomes, possible dimensions of concerns and risks should be addressed before its integration with routine clinical care. Objective: The main objective of this study was to examine how potential users (patients) perceive the benefits, risks, and use of AI clinical applications for their health care purposes and how their perceptions may be different if faced with three health care service encounter scenarios. Methods: We designed a 2×3 experiment that crossed a type of health condition (ie, acute or chronic) with three different types of clinical encounters between patients and physicians (ie, AI clinical applications as substituting technology, AI clinical applications as augmenting technology, and no AI as a traditional in-person visit). We used an online survey to collect data from 634 individuals in the United States. Results: The interactions between the types of health care service encounters and health conditions significantly influenced individuals' perceptions of privacy concerns, trust issues, communication barriers, concerns about transparency in regulatory standards, liability risks, benefits, and intention to use across the six scenarios. We found no significant differences among scenarios regarding perceptions of performance risk and social biases. Conclusions: The results imply that incompatibility with instrumental, technical, ethical, or regulatory values can be a reason for rejecting AI applications in health care. Thus, there are still various risks associated with implementing AI applications in diagnostics and treatment recommendations for patients with both acute and chronic illnesses. The concerns are also evident if the AI applications are used as a recommendation system under physician experience, wisdom, and control. Prior to the widespread rollout of AI, more studies are needed to identify the challenges that may raise concerns for implementing and using AI applications. This study could provide researchers and managers with critical insights into the determinants of individuals' intention to use AI clinical applications. Regulatory agencies should establish normative standards and evaluation guidelines for implementing AI in health care in cooperation with health care institutions. Regular audits and ongoing monitoring and reporting systems can be used to continuously evaluate the safety, quality, transparency, and ethical factors of AI clinical applications.

Disclosing Personal Health Information to Emotional Human Doctors or Unemotional AI Doctors? Experimental Evidence Based on Privacy Calculus Theory

Designing Medical Artificial Intelligence for In- and Out-Groups

Examining the Impact of Personalization and Carefulness in AI-Generated Health Advice: Trust, Adoption, and Insights in Online Healthcare Consultations Experiments

Following Medical Advice of an AI or a Human Doctor? Experimental Evidence Based on Clinician-Patient Communication Pathway Model

Patients' Perceptions Toward Human-Artificial Intelligence Interaction in Health Care: Experimental Study

Behavioral and neural evidence on consumer responses to human doctors and medical artificial intelligence

Consumers' responses to personalized service from medical artificial intelligence and human doctors

When an AI Doctor Gets Personal: The Effects of Social and Medical Individuation in Encounters With Human and AI Doctors

Choosing human over AI doctors? How comparative trust associations and knowledge relate to risk and benefit perceptions of AI in healthcare

Patients need emotional support: Managing physician disclosure information to attract more patients

Do patients prefer a human doctor, artificial intelligence, or a blend, and is this preference dependent on medical discipline? Empirical evidence and implications for medical practice

Do You Mind if I Ask You a Personal Question? How AI Service Agents Alter Consumer Self-Disclosure

Evaluating if trust and personal information privacy concerns are barriers to using health insurance that explicitly utilizes AI

Overcome Medical Algorithm Aversion: Conditional Joint Effect of Direct and Indirect Information

An investigation into factors affecting the willingness to disclose personal health information when using AI-enabled caregiver robots

Revealing the source: How awareness alters perceptions of AI and human-generated mental health responses

Public Perception of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Care: Content Analysis of Social Media

Exploring perceptions of healthcare technologies enabled by artificial intelligence: an online, scenario-based survey

Could artificial intelligence make human doctors obsolete? A survey based on public attitudes

Patient Perspectives on AI for Mental Health Care: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

Population Preferences for Performance and Explainability of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: Choice-Based Conjoint Survey