Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Understanding adoption intention of virtual medical consultation systems: : Perceptions of ChatGPT and satisfaction with doctors

Published: 08 August 2024 Publication History

Abstract

This study examined the impact of perceptions of ChatGPT, the leading AI chatbot since November 2022, on the acceptance and perceived efficacy of future GPT-powered virtual medical consultation systems (GPT-VMCSs), as well as their influence on the propensity to adopt such systems amid debates over their suitability for medical consultations. By utilizing the technology acceptance model (TAM), this study differentiated between perceptions of ChatGPT and GPT-VMCS by assessing how these perceptions, along with doctor satisfaction, resistance, and ChatGPT usage, affect adoption intentions. Among the 2150 participants from 21 countries, 1038 who had used ChatGPT or observed its use were selected for hypothesis testing. The results indicated that the perceived usefulness (PU) of the GPT-VMCS was the strongest predictor of adoption intentions, with the perceived ease of use (PEOU) also playing a critical role. In contrast, resistance, which was positively influenced by doctor satisfaction, was negatively associated with adoption intentions. The quality of ChatGPT responses was positively correlated with GPT-VMCS PU, although direct usage of ChatGPT did not significantly affect adoption intentions. The study concludes with a discussion of both theoretical and practical implications.

Highlights

This study probed ChatGPT's impacts on virtual medical chatbots' adoption intentions.
A survey of 2150 respondents across 21 countries was conducted.
Satisfaction with doctors negatively impacted adoption intentions.

References

[1]
A.A. Abd-alrazaq, M. Alajlani, A.A. Alalwan, B.M. Bewick, P. Gardner, M. Househ, An overview of the features of chatbots in mental health: A scoping review, International Journal of Medical Informatics 132 (2019),.
[2]
F. Abdullah, R. Ward, Developing a general extended technology acceptance model for E-learning (GETAMEL) by analysing commonly used external factors, Computers in Human Behavior 56 (2016) 238–256.
[3]
I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (2) (1991) 179–211.
[4]
R.L. Bashshur, J.D. Howell, E.A. Krupinski, K.M. Harms, N. Bashshur, C.R. Doarn, The empirical foundations of telemedicine interventions in primary care, Telemedicine and e-Health 22 (5) (2016) 342–375,.
[5]
S. Botti, K. Orfali, S.S. Iyengar, Tragic choices: Autonomy and emotional responses to medical decisions, Journal of Consumer Research 36 (3) (2009) 337–352.
[6]
M.B. Brewer, The social self: On being the same and different at the same time, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 17 (5) (1991) 475–482.
[7]
T.A. Brown, Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research, Guilford Publications, 2006, https://books.google.com/books?id=KZwDkH2G2PMC.
[8]
B.M. Byrne, Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming, Lawrence Erlbaum, 2001.
[9]
Castelvecchi, D. (2022). Are ChatGPT and AlphaCode going to replace programmers? Nature. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04383-z.
[10]
L. Chang, J.C.J. Lim, Traditional Chinese medicine physicians' insights into interprofessional tensions between traditional Chinese medicine and biomedicine: A critical perspective, Health Communication 34 (2) (2019) 238–247,.
[11]
P.Y.K. Chau, P.J. Hu, Examining a model of information technology acceptance by individual professionals: An exploratory study, Journal of Management Information Systems 18 (4) (2002) 191–229,.
[12]
F.D. Davis, Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology, MIS Quarterly 13 (3) (1989) 319–340,.
[13]
F.D. Davis, R.P. Bagozzi, P.R. Warshaw, User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models, Management Science 35 (8) (1989) 982–1003.
[14]
L. De Angelis, F. Baglivo, G. Arzilli, G.P. Privitera, P. Ferragina, A.E. Tozzi, C. Rizzo, ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: The new ai-driven infodemic threat in public health, 2023, Available at: SSRN 4352931.
[15]
W.J. Doll, G. Torkzadeh, The measurement of end-user computing satisfaction, MIS Quarterly 12 (2) (1988) 259–274,.
[16]
K.K. Fitzpatrick, A. Darcy, M. Vierhile, Delivering cognitive behavior therapy to young adults with symptoms of depression and anxiety using a fully automated conversational agent (woebot): A randomized controlled trial, JMIR Mental Health 4 (2) (2017),.
[17]
M.F. Furukawa, J. King, V. Patel, C.-J. Hsiao, J. Adler-Milstein, A.K. Jha, Despite substantial progress in EHR adoption, health information exchange and patient engagement remain low in office settings, Health Affairs 33 (9) (2014) 1672–1679,.
[18]
X. Gong, K.Z. Zhang, C. Chen, C.M. Cheung, M.K. Lee, Transition from web to mobile payment services: The triple effects of status quo inertia, International Journal of Information Management 50 (2020) 310–324.
[19]
S. Goode, A note on service switching: Evidence from cloud storage services, Services Marketing Quarterly 36 (2) (2015) 153–172.
[20]
B. Guldvog, Can patient satisfaction improve health among patients with angina pectoris?, International Journal for Quality in Health Care 11 (3) (1999) 233–240.
[21]
J.F. Hair, C.M. Ringle, M. Sarstedt, PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 19 (2) (2011) 139–152,.
[22]
N. Haslam, Dehumanization: An integrative review, Personality and Social Psychology Review 10 (3) (2006) 252–264.
[23]
H. Heijden, User acceptance of hedonic information systems, MIS Quarterly 28 (4) (2004) 695–704.
[24]
R.J. Holden, B.-T. Karsh, The Technology Acceptance Model: Its past and its future in health care, Journal of Biomedical Informatics 43 (1) (2010) 159–172,.
[25]
P.-J. Hsieh, An empirical investigation of patients' acceptance and resistance toward the health cloud: The dual factor perspective, Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016) 959–969.
[26]
L.t. Hu, P.M. Bentler, Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 6 (1) (1999) 1–55,.
[27]
S.A. Kamal, M. Shafiq, P. Kakria, Investigating acceptance of telemedicine services through an extended technology acceptance model (TAM), Technology in Society 60 (2020),.
[28]
K.H. Kim, The relation among fit indexes, power, and sample size in structural equation modeling, Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 12 (3) (2005) 368–390,.
[29]
R.B. Kline, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, Guilford, 1998.
[30]
R.B. Kline, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, Guilford Publications, 2011, https://books.google.com/books?id=mGf3Ex59AX0C.
[31]
K.M. Kostick-Quenet, S. Gerke, AI in the hands of imperfect users, Npj Digital Medicine 5 (1) (2022) 197.
[32]
T.H. Kung, M. Cheatham, A. Medenilla, C. Sillos, L. De Leon, C. Elepaño, M. Madriaga, R. Aggabao, G. Diaz-Candido, J. Maningo, Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI-assisted medical education using large language models, PLoS digital health 2 (2) (2023).
[33]
L. Laranjo, A.G. Dunn, H.L. Tong, A.B. Kocaballi, J. Chen, R. Bashir, D. Surian, B. Gallego, F. Magrabi, A.Y.S. Lau, E. Coiera, Conversational agents in healthcare: A systematic review, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 25 (9) (2018) 1248–1258,.
[34]
K. Liu, D. Tao, The roles of trust, personalization, loss of privacy, and anthropomorphism in public acceptance of smart healthcare services, Computers in Human Behavior 127 (2022),.
[35]
C. Longoni, A. Bonezzi, C.K. Morewedge, Resistance to medical artificial intelligence, Journal of Consumer Research 46 (4) (2019) 629–650.
[36]
D. Lupton, The digitally engaged patient: Self-monitoring and self-care in the digital health era, Social Theory & Health 11 (3) (2013) 256–270,.
[37]
G.N. Marshall, R.D. Hays, The patient satisfaction questionnaire short form (PSQ-18), RAND Corporation, 1994,.
[38]
E. Martínez-Caro, J.G. Cegarra-Navarro, A. García-Pérez, M. Fait, Healthcare service evolution towards the Internet of Things: An end-user perspective, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 136 (2018) 268–276,.
[39]
A.S. Miner, L. Laranjo, A.B. Kocaballi, Chatbots in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic, NPJ Digital Medicine 3 (1) (2020) 65,.
[40]
J.L.Z. Montenegro, C.A. da Costa, R. da Rosa Righi, Survey of conversational agents in health, Expert Systems with Applications 129 (2019) 56–67,.
[41]
J.-W. Moon, Y.-G. Kim, Extending the TAM for a world-wide-web context, Information & management 38 (4) (2001) 217–230.
[42]
T.T. Moores, Towards an integrated model of IT acceptance in healthcare, Decision Support Systems 53 (3) (2012) 507–516,.
[43]
Z. Obermeyer, E.J. Emanuel, Predicting the future—big data, machine learning, and clinical medicine, New England Journal of Medicine 375 (13) (2016) 1216.
[44]
A. Palanica, P. Flaschner, A. Thommandram, M. Li, Y. Fossat, Physicians' perceptions of chatbots in health care: Cross-sectional web-based survey, Journal of Medical Internet Research 21 (4) (2019),.
[45]
N. Park, Adoption and use of computer-based voice over Internet protocol phone service: Toward an integrated model, Journal of Communication 60 (1) (2010) 40–72.
[46]
N. Park, M. Rhoads, J. Hou, K.M. Lee, Understanding the acceptance of teleconferencing systems among employees: An extension of the technology acceptance model, Computers in Human Behavior 39 (2014) 118–127,.
[47]
K.A. Peddie, R.J. Kelly-Campbell, How people with hearing impairment in New Zealand use the Internet to obtain information about their hearing health, Computers in Human Behavior 73 (2017) 141–151.
[48]
M. Sallam, ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research, and practice: Systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns, Healthcare (Basel) 11 (6) (2023),.
[49]
M. Sallam, N.A. Salim, A.B. Al-Tammemi, M. Barakat, D. Fayyad, S. Hallit, H. Harapan, R. Hallit, A. Mahafzah, ChatGPT output regarding compulsory vaccination and COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy: A descriptive study at the outset of a paradigm shift in online search for information, Cureus 15 (2) (2023),.
[50]
W. Samuelson, R. Zeckhauser, Status quo bias in decision making, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1 (1988) 7–59.
[51]
F. Sanmarchi, A. Bucci, A. Nuzzolese, G. Carullo, F. Toscano, N. Nante, D. Golinelli, A step-by-step researcher’s guide to the use of an AI-based transformer in epidemiology: an exploratory analysis of ChatGPT using the STROBE checklist for observational studies, Journal of Public Health (2023) 1–36.
[52]
C.R. Snyder, H.L. Fromkin, Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
[53]
C. Stokel-Walker, R. Van Noorden, What ChatGPT and generative AI mean for science, Nature 614 (7947) (2023) 214–216.
[54]
H. Sun, P. Zhang, The role of moderating factors in user technology acceptance, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64 (2) (2006) 53–78,.
[55]
S.S.-L. Tan, N. Goonawardene, Internet health information seeking and the patient-physician relationship: A systematic review, Journal of Medical Internet Research 19 (1) (2017).
[56]
V. Venkatesh, F.D. Davis, A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies, Management Science 46 (2) (2000) 186–204,.
[57]
J.E. Ware, M.K. Snyder, W.R. Wright, A.R. Davies, Defining and measuring patient satisfaction with medical care, Evaluation and Program Planning 6 (3–4) (1983) 247–263.
[58]
A.K. Yarbrough, T.B. Smith, Technology acceptance among physicians: A new take on TAM, Medical Care Research and Review 64 (6) (2007) 650–672.
[59]
T. Ye, J. Xue, M. He, J. Gu, H. Lin, B. Xu, Y. Cheng, Psychosocial factors affecting artificial intelligence adoption in health care in China: Cross-sectional study, Journal of Medical Internet Research 21 (10) (2019).
[60]
J. Zhang, E. Mao, Understanding the acceptance of mobile SMS advertising among young Chinese consumers, Psychology and Marketing 25 (8) (2008) 787–805.

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers in Human Behavior
Computers in Human Behavior  Volume 159, Issue C
Oct 2024
366 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 08 August 2024

Author Tags

  1. ChatGPT
  2. Artificial intelligence
  3. Telemedicine
  4. TAM
  5. Health communication

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media