Lune

CHI2020Top-tier venue

Ambiguity-aware AI Assistants for Medical Data Analysis

Mike Schaekermann, Graeme Beaton, Elaheh Sanoubari, Andrew Lim, Kate Larson, Edith Law

2020Year
45Citations
12Top-tier citations

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) assistants for clinical decision making show increasing promise in medicine. However, medical assessments can be contentious, leading to expert disagreement. This raises the question of how AI assistants should be designed to handle the classification of ambiguous cases. Our study compared two AI assistants that provide classification labels for medical time series data along with quantitative uncertainty estimates: conventional vs. ambiguity-aware. We simulated our ambiguity-aware AI based on real-world expert discussions to highlight cases likely to lead to expert disagreement, and to present arguments for conflicting classification choices. Our results demonstrate that ambiguity-aware AI can alter expert workflows by significantly increasing the proportion of contentious cases reviewed. We also found that the relevance of AI-provided arguments (selected from guidelines either randomly or by experts) affected experts' accuracy at revising AI-suggested labels. Our work contributes a novel perspective on the design of AI for contentious clinical assessments.

Ask about this paper

Your agent reads all of it.

Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.

Questions to start from

Your agent calls

Luneget_paper_fulltext

Ask in Lune

Free to start. No credit card required.

lune papers fulltext 5f617dd7-c351-4eb3-89be-83991809d5ec

Cited by top-tier papers12

Ask how each one uses it

Builds on1

Related papers

Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines