| Title |
Will artificial intelligence solve the human resource crisis in healthcare?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-018-3359-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bertalan Meskó, Gergely Hetényi, Zsuzsanna Győrffy |
| Abstract |
Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to ease the human resources crisis in healthcare by facilitating diagnostics, decision-making, big data analytics and administration, among others. For this we must first tackle the technological, ethical and legal obstacles.The human resource crisis is widening worldwide, and it is obvious that it is not possible to provide care without workforce. How can disruptive technologies in healthcare help solve the variety of human resource problems? Will technology empower physicians or replace them? How can the medical curriculum, including post-graduate education prepare professionals for the meaningful use of technology? These questions have been growing for decades, and the promise of disruptive technologies filling them is imminent with digital health becoming widespread. Authors of this essay argue that AI might not only fill the human resources gap, but also raises ethical questions we need to deal with today.While there are even more questions to address, our stand is that AI is not meant to replace caregivers, but those who use AI will probably replace those who don't. And it is possible to prepare for that. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 75 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 10 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 7% |
| Canada | 5 | 7% |
| Sweden | 3 | 4% |
| Colombia | 3 | 4% |
| Hungary | 3 | 4% |
| United Arab Emirates | 2 | 3% |
| Belgium | 2 | 3% |
| Mexico | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 26 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 59 | 79% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 12 | 16% |
| Scientists | 4 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 642 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 642 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 83 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 58 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 52 | 8% |
| Researcher | 39 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 37 | 6% |
| Other | 96 | 15% |
| Unknown | 277 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 66 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 59 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 47 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 37 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 34 | 5% |
| Other | 104 | 16% |
| Unknown | 295 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2023.
All research outputs
#487,291
of 25,035,235 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#80
of 8,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,704
of 332,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#5
of 224 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,035,235 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 224 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.