Cognitive Dependency on Clinical Decision Support Systems: Implications for Diagnostic Reasoning

Zahratul Hayati; Imran  Yaman; Yayah  Sya'diah

doi:10.55927/ajha.v5i1.16251

Authors

Zahratul Hayati Akademi Kebidanan Surya Mandiri Bima
Imran Yaman STIKES Marendeng Majene
Yayah Sya'diah Akademi Perekam Medis and Infokes Bhumi Husada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55927/ajha.v5i1.16251

Keywords:

Clinical Decision Support Systems, Cognitive Dependence, Diagnostic Reasoning, Automation Bias, Medic Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

The development of artificial intelligence-based Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) has transformed the diagnostic decision-making process in modern health practice. Although CDSS is capable of improving clinical efficiency and accuracy, overuse has the potential to lead to cognitive dependency and automation bias that can affect the quality of medical personnel's diagnostic reasoning. This article aims to conceptually analyze the implications of dependence on CDSS on critical thinking processes and clinical decision-making. The study was conducted through a review of the latest literature in the field of health informatics and behavioral decision-making. The results of the analysis show that CDSS acts as an effective cognitive augmentation tool when used proportionally, but can weaken analytical evaluation if used without critical reflection. An implementation approach that emphasizes a balance between technological support and the professional autonomy of health workers is needed to maintain the integrity of diagnostic reasoning in the digital age.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Amann, J., Blasimme, A., Vayena, E., Frey, D., & Madai, V. I. (2020). Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: A multidisciplinary perspective. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 20(1), 310. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01332-6

Babic, B., Gerke, S., Evgeniou, T., & Cohen, I. G. (2021). Beware explanations from artificial intelligence in health care. Science, 373(6552), 284–286. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abg1834

Blease, C., Kaptchuk, T. J., Bernstein, M. H., & Mandl, K. D. (2022). Artificial intelligence and the future of primary care: Exploratory qualitative study of UK general practitioners' views. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 24(3), e34672. https://doi.org/10.2196/34672

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage Publications.

Croskerry, P. (2020). A universal model of diagnostic reasoning. Academic Medicine, 95(1), 24–27. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002905

Gaube, S., Suresh, H., Raue, M., Merritt, A., Berkowitz, S. J., Lermer, E., & Coughlin, J. F. (2021). Do as AI say: Susceptibility in deployment of clinical decision-aids. npj Digital Medicine, 4(31). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-021-00385-9

Goddard, K., Roudsari, A., & Wyatt, J. C. (2022). Automation bias: Empirical results assessing influencing factors. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 158, 104644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104644

Jacobs, M., Pradier, M. F., McCoy, T. H., Perlis, R. H., Doshi-Velez, F., & Gajos, K. Z. (2021). How machine-learning recommendations influence clinician treatment selections. Scientific Reports, 11, 13624. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92930-0

Juravle, G., Boudouraki, A., Terziyska, M., & Rezlescu, C. (2020). Trust in artificial intelligence for medical diagnoses. Progress in Brain Research, 253, 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2020.07.006

Kelly, C. J., Karthikesalingam, A., Suleyman, M., Corrado, G., & King, D. (2021). Key challenges for delivering clinical impact with artificial intelligence. BMC Medicine, 19(1), 195. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-021-02094-0

Khairat, S., Coleman, C., Ottmar, P., & Bice, T. (2021). Perceived burden of EHRs on physicians at different stages of their careers. Applied Clinical Informatics, 12(2), 348–358. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1728804

Liu, X., Rivera, S. C., Moher, D., Calvert, M. J., & Denniston, A. K. (2022). Reporting guidelines for clinical trials evaluating artificial intelligence interventions are needed. Nature Medicine, 28, 1029–1032. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01735-8

Lyell, D., & Coiera, E. (2020). Automation bias and verification complexity: A systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27(4), 674–681. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocz212

Lyell, D., Magrabi, F., & Coiera, E. (2021). Automation bias in electronic prescribing. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 146, 104347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104347

Markus, A. F., Kors, J. A., & Rijnbeek, P. R. (2021). The role of explainability in creating trustworthy artificial intelligence for health care. The Lancet Digital Health, 3(10), e645–e648. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2589-7500(21)00121-6

Monteiro, S., Sherbino, J., Ilgen, J., Dore, K. L., & Norman, G. (2021). Diagnostic reasoning: Where we've been, where we're going. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 33(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2020.1812268

Mosier, K. L., Skitka, L. J., Dunbar, M., & McDonnell, L. (2020). Automation bias: Decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. Human Factors, 62(4), 609–620.

Norman, G. R., Monteiro, S., Sherbino, J., Ilgen, J., Schmidt, H., & Mamede, S. (2021). The causes of errors in clinical reasoning: Cognitive biases, knowledge deficits, and dual process thinking. Academic Medicine, 96(2), 187–192. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003888

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Peiffer-Smadja, N., Rawson, T. M., Ahmad, R., Buchard, A., Georgiou, P., Holmes, A. H., & Satta, G. (2020). Machine learning for clinical decision support in infectious diseases. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 26(5), 584–595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2019.12.012

Reddy, S., Allan, S., Coghlan, S., & Cooper, P. (2022). A governance model for the application of AI in health care. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 29(3), 491–497. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocab239

Richardson, S., Waring, J., & Wyatt, J. C. (2021). Clinical decision support systems: A discussion of quality and governance. BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 28(1), e100263. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2020-100263

Schinkel, M., Paranjape, K., Nannan Panday, R., Skyttberg, N., & Nanayakkara, P. (2022). Clinical decision support systems: A review of their impact on workflow and performance. BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 29(1), e100486. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2021-100486

Sendak, M. P., Ratliff, W., Sarro, D., Alderton, E., Futoma, J., Gao, M., ... Ball, S. (2020). Real-world integration of a sepsis deep learning technology into routine clinical care. NPJ Digital Medicine, 3, 111. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0296-6

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Sutton, R. T., Pincock, D., Baumgart, D. C., Sadowski, D. C., Fedorak, R. N., & Kroeker, K. I. (2020). An overview of clinical decision support systems: Benefits, risks, and strategies for success. NPJ Digital Medicine, 3, 17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0221-y

Tonekaboni, S., Joshi, S., McCradden, M. D., & Goldenberg, A. (2020). What clinicians want: Contextualizing explainable machine learning for clinical end use. NPJ Digital Medicine, 3, 134. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-00342-1

Topol, E. (2021). Deep medicine: How artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. Basic Books.

Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971