Skip to content

AI Quality and Clinical Roles Impact Decision Quality in AI-Augmented Medical Decisions More than AI Explanations.

Sep 2026 · Medical decision making · pp. 272989X261484927 · 1 citation · 28 references
Medicine

TL;DR

The findings suggest that detailed AI explanations do not necessarily improve AI-augmented medical decisions even though they can increase trust in AI recommendations and the importance of AI recommendation quality in clinical decision making is underscored.

Abstract

Background

Explainable AI has garnered significant attention in recent years, particularly in high-risk domains such as health care. Despite the enthusiasm, empirical evidence on the impact of AI explanations remains mixed. This study explores the effects of AI-generated recommendations and various types of AI explanations on clinical decision quality.

Methods

We conducted 3 experiments involving clinicians who made drug-dosing decisions using AI recommendations of differing quality and explanations. We evaluated 4 types of explanations: a global explanation about how the AI system worked and 3 case-specific local explanations that respectively included the What (what factors were considered for the case), What+Why (why the factors mattered), and What+Why+How (how the system considered them). We recruited clinicians with varying levels of domain expertise, including pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and midlevel providers.

Results

Our results suggest that compared with AI explanations, AI recommendation quality played a more important role in decision quality. Clinical roles, a proxy for domain knowledge, moderated the effects of AI recommendation quality on decision quality and AI influence. Compared with pharmacists and physicians with greater domain knowledge, midlevel providers and nurses were more susceptible to being influenced by low-quality AI recommendations. Contrary to theoretical predictions, local AI explanations increased trust in the AI system but did not improve decision quality over global explanations. Instead, trust in AI seemed largely unrelated to clinical decision quality.

Conclusion

This study underscores the importance of AI recommendation quality in clinical decision making and the need to personalize AI design and AI training to clinicians with different roles and domain knowledge. Our findings also suggest that detailed AI explanations do not necessarily improve AI-augmented medical decisions even though they can increase trust in AI recommendations.

View source

Similar papers

Review Open access Sep 2026

When Do Physicians Trust AI? The Role of Clinical Context in Decision Support: SMART vignette study

Background Physicians’ confidence in clinical AI tools and perceptions of their effectiveness can influence the adoption of these tools in practice, which in turn, could affect the quality of patient care. However, the factors shaping these perceptions remain poorly understood. Methods We surveyed U.S. family medicine...

Bohye Kim, Katie Ryan, M. Kasun et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Effects of Type and Timing of Clinician-Facing AI Support on Patient Trust in Medical Consultations: 2 Vignette Experiments

The use of AI to support physicians appears more acceptable when used for analytical rather than decisional support, or when physicians’ decisional independence is visibly retained, suggesting that trust in AI-supported medical decisions depends not only on whether physicians use AI support but also on subjective perce...

Insa Schaffernak, Julia Cecil, Eesha Kokje et al. · 1 citation
Review Open access Jul 2026

From Algorithm to Bedside: A Clinician's Framework for AI in Practice

This article proposes seven questions that clinicians can run through to evaluate any clinical AI tool in the time it takes to read an abstract, alongside a traffic-light schema for matching oversight to risk and a short list of demands clinicians should make of vendors and institutions.

Alaa Abdelqader, M. Alkhateeb, Abdullah Al-Marrawi et al. · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

Explainable AI in Healthcare: A Comparative Analysis of Interpretability Techniques for Clinical Decision Support Systems

It is concluded that explainable artificial intelligence improves trust, reliability, and accountability in healthcare systems and is a prerequisite for successful integration of intelligent technologies into clinical practice.

Riya Jacob K · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

An Explainable AI-Driven Framework for Integrating Diverse Health Data to Enhance Predictive Accuracy and Clinical Interpretability

A framework through XAI to incorporate various health data sources such as electronic health records, medical imaging, laboratory reports, and wearable sensor information, which can be integrated in the context of achieving higher predictive performance in disease prediction and treatment stratification, as well as dec...

M. Aparna, S. Lahane, Dr. Bharti A. Dixit · 0 citations
Review Open access Aug 2026

MDEF-AI: a multi-level dynamic evaluation framework for assessing the impact of AI-based clinical decision support on decision quality and patient safety

A multi-level, dynamic conceptual evaluation framework that integrates system design characteristics, human–AI interaction mechanisms, contextual moderators, and temporally dynamic feedback loops to provide a comprehensive analytical lens for assessing the impact of AI-CDSS on clinical decision quality and patient safe...

G. Karraz, Anas Shahin · 0 citations

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 7, 2026

Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses

Training AI agents with reinforcement learning can be challenging because their tools, context, and decision-making are managed by complex frameworks. Agent Lightning connects existing agents to RL training, making it easier to improve them without rebuilding them. The post Agent Lightning v1.0: A 3,500-Line Lightweight Agentic RL Framework for Training Agents with Real Harnesses appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.