Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
IntroductionThe application of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiation therapy holds promise for addressing challenges, such as healthcare staff shortages, increased efficiency and treatment planning variations. Increased AI adoption has the potential to standardise treatment protocols, enhance quality, improve patient outcomes, and reduce costs. However, drawbacks include impacts on employment and algorithmic biases, making it crucial to navigate trade‐offs. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was undertaken to examine the AI‐related characteristics radiation oncology professionals think are most important for adoption in radiation therapy treatment planning.MethodsRadiation oncology professionals completed an online discrete choice experiment to express their preferences about AI systems for radiation therapy planning which were described by five attributes, each with 2–4 levels: accuracy, automation, exploratory ability, compatibility with other systems and impact on workload. The survey also included questions about attitudes to AI. Choices were modelled using mixed logit regression.ResultsThe survey was completed by 82 respondents. The results showed they preferred AI systems that offer the largest time saving, and that provide explanations of the AI reasoning (both in‐depth and basic). They also favoured systems that provide improved contouring precision compared with manual systems. Respondents emphasised the importance of AI systems being cost‐effective, while also recognising AI's impact on professional roles, responsibilities, and service delivery.ConclusionsThis study provides important information about radiation oncology professionals' priorities for AI in treatment planning. The findings from this study can be used to inform future research on economic evaluations and management perspectives of AI‐driven technologies in radiation therapy.
IntroductionThe application of artificial intelligence (AI) in radiation therapy holds promise for addressing challenges, such as healthcare staff shortages, increased efficiency and treatment planning variations. Increased AI adoption has the potential to standardise treatment protocols, enhance quality, improve patient outcomes, and reduce costs. However, drawbacks include impacts on employment and algorithmic biases, making it crucial to navigate trade‐offs. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was undertaken to examine the AI‐related characteristics radiation oncology professionals think are most important for adoption in radiation therapy treatment planning.MethodsRadiation oncology professionals completed an online discrete choice experiment to express their preferences about AI systems for radiation therapy planning which were described by five attributes, each with 2–4 levels: accuracy, automation, exploratory ability, compatibility with other systems and impact on workload. The survey also included questions about attitudes to AI. Choices were modelled using mixed logit regression.ResultsThe survey was completed by 82 respondents. The results showed they preferred AI systems that offer the largest time saving, and that provide explanations of the AI reasoning (both in‐depth and basic). They also favoured systems that provide improved contouring precision compared with manual systems. Respondents emphasised the importance of AI systems being cost‐effective, while also recognising AI's impact on professional roles, responsibilities, and service delivery.ConclusionsThis study provides important information about radiation oncology professionals' priorities for AI in treatment planning. The findings from this study can be used to inform future research on economic evaluations and management perspectives of AI‐driven technologies in radiation therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.