Commentary: Patient Perspectives on Artificial Intelligence; What have We Learned and How Should We Move Forward?

Artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare has now begun to make its contributions to real-world patient care with varying degrees of both public and clinical acceptability around it. The heavy investment from governments, industry and academia needed to reach this point has helped to surface different perspectives on AI. As clinical AI applications become a reality, however, there is an increasing need to harness and integrate patient perspectives, which address the distinct needs of different populations, healthcare systems and clinical problems more closely. Despite this need, patient perspectives on AI implementation have little presence in academic literature and within implementation science and are not sufficiently considered throughout the MedTech and eHealthtech product development cycle, which brings its own challenges and opportunities. This joint patient expert/clinician commentary aims to briefly summarise views on AI. It reflects upon recommendations on how stakeholders such as clinicians and Health & MedTech small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can make practical usage of these views. The recommendations of the authors centre around how to work better with patients to enable both product centric and patient centric innovation and person-centred care.

Patients' knowledge, preferences, and perspectives about data protection and data control: an exploratory survey.

Background: In the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) plays a central role in the complex health research legal framework. It aims to protect the fundamental right to the protection of individuals' personal data, while allowing the free movement of such data. However, it has been criticized for challenging the conduct of research. Existing scholarship has paid little attention to the experiences and views of the patient community. The aim of the study was to investigate 1) the awareness and knowledge of patients, carers, and members of patient organizations about the General Data Protection Regulation, 2) their experience with exercising data subject rights, and 3) their understanding of the notion of "data control" and preferences towards various data control tools. Methods: An online survey was disseminated between December 2022 and March 2023. Quantitative data was analyzed descriptively and inferentially. Answers to open-ended questions were analyzed using the thematic analysis method. Results: In total, 220 individuals from 28 European countries participated. The majority were patients (77%). Most participants had previously heard about the GDPR (90%) but had not exercised any of their data subject rights. Individual data control tools appeared to be marginally more important than collective tools. The willingness of participants to share personal data with data altruism organizations increased if patient representatives would be involved in the decision-making processes of such organizations. Conclusion: The results highlighted the importance of providing in-depth education about data protection. Although participants showed a slight preference towards individual control tools, the reflection based on existing scholarship identified that individual control holds risks that could be mitigated through carefully operationalized collective tools. The discussion of results was used to provide a critical view into the proposed European Health Data Space, which has yet to find a productive balance between individual control and allowing the reuse of personal data for research.