This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Digital Health Reviews (776) Reviews (58) Artificial Intelligence (660) Clinical Information and Decision Making (897)

Published on in Vol 25 (2023)

This is a member publication of University College London (Jisc)

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/39742, first published .
Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence

Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence

Stakeholder Perspectives of Clinical Artificial Intelligence Implementation: Systematic Review of Qualitative Evidence

Authors of this article:

Henry David Jeffry Hogg 1, 2, 3 Author Orcid Image ;   Mohaimen Al-Zubaidy 1, 2 Author Orcid Image ;   Technology Enhanced Macular Services Study Reference Group 1 ;   James Talks 2 Author Orcid Image ;   Alastair K Denniston 4, 5 Author Orcid Image ;   Christopher J Kelly 6 Author Orcid Image ;   Johann Malawana 7, 8 Author Orcid Image ;   Chrysanthi Papoutsi 9 Author Orcid Image ;   Marion Dawn Teare 1 Author Orcid Image ;   Pearse A Keane 3, 10 Author Orcid Image ;   Fiona R Beyer 11 Author Orcid Image ;   Gregory Maniatopoulos 1, 12 Author Orcid Image
Article Authors Cited by (1) Tweetations (8) Metrics

Journals

  1. Hogg H, Brittain K, Teare D, Talks J, Balaskas K, Keane P, Maniatopoulos G. Safety and efficacy of an artificial intelligence-enabled decision tool for treatment decisions in neovascular age-related macular degeneration and an exploration of clinical pathway integration and implementation: protocol for a multi-methods validation study. BMJ Open 2023;13(2):e069443 View