Automation bias: Empirical results assessing influencing factors

International Journal of Medical Informatics

Volumn 83, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 368-375

  Goddard, Kate ^a   Roudsari, Abdul ^a,b   Wyatt, Jeremy C ^c  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical decision making; Clinical decision support systems; Prescribing

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; AUTOMATION; SWITCHING;

CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; CLINICAL EXPERIENCE; DECISION ACCURACIES; DECISION SUPPORTS; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; PRESCRIBING; TASK DIFFICULTY;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; AUTOMATION BIAS; CONSULTATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; EMPIRICISM; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; MALE; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRESCRIPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL BIAS; TRUST; UNITED KINGDOM; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; MEDICAL ERROR; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL; STANDARDS; TASK PERFORMANCE; UTILIZATION;

ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; AUTOMATION; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL ERRORS; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY CONTROL; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; TRUST;

EID: 84897402890     PISSN: 13865056     EISSN: 18728243     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.001     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Goddard K., Roudsari A., Wyatt J. Automation bias-a systematic review of rates, mediators and mitigators. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2012, 19:121-127.
2. Friedman C.P., Elstein A.S., Wolf F.M., et al. Enhancement of clinicians' diagnostic reasoning by computer-based consultation: a multisite study of 2 systems. JAMA 1999, 282:1851-1856.
3. Berner E.S., Maisiak R.S., Heudebert G.R., et al. Clinician performance and prominence of diagnoses displayed by a clinical diagnostic decision support system. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2003, 76-80.
4. Westbrook J.I., Coiera E.W., Gosling A.S. Do online information retrieval systems help experienced clinicians answer clinical questions?. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2005, 12(3):315-321.
5. McKibbon K.A., Fridsma D.B. Effectiveness of clinician-selected electronic information resources for answering primary care physicians' information needs. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13:653-659.
6. Tsai T.L., Fridsma D.B., Gatti G. Computer decision support as a source of interpretation error: the case of electrocardiograms. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2003, 10:478-483.
7. Hillson S.D., Connelly D.P., Liu Y. The effects of computer-assisted electrocardiographic interpretation on physicians' diagnostic decisions. Med. Decis. Making 1995, 15:107-112.
8. Southern W.N., Arnsten J.H. The effect of erroneous computer interpretation of ECGs on resident decision making. Med. Decis. Making 2009, 29:372-376.
9. Sowan A.K., Gaffoor M., Soeken K., et al. A comparison of medication administrations errors using CPOE orders vs. handwritten orders for pediatric continuous drug infusions. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2006, 1105.
10. National Patient Safety Agency Patient Safety Incident Reports in the NHS National Reporting and Learning System Quarterly Data Summary England. Issue 14 2009, Available at: http://www.nrls.npsa.nhs.uk/resources/collections/quarterly-data-summaries/ (cited September 2011).
11. Barber N., Rawlins M., Franklin B.D. Reducing prescribing error: competence, control, and culture. Qual. Saf. Health Care 2003, 12:29-32.
12. Williams M.L., Dennis A.R., Stam A., Aronson J.E. The impact of DSS use and information load on errors and decision quality. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2007, 176(1):468-481.
13. An in depth investigation into causes of prescribing errors by foundation trainees in relation to their medical education-EQUIP study 2009, Available from http://www.gmc-uk.org/about/research/research_commissioned_4.asp (cited October 2011).
14. Avery A.J., Rodgers S., Cantrill J.A., et al. A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet 2012, 379:1319-1320.
15. Pearson S.A., Moxey A., Robertson J., Hains I., Williamson N., Reeve J., Newby D. Do computerised clinical decision support systems for prescribing change practice? A systematic review of the literature (1990-2007). BMC Health Serv. Res. 2009, 28(9):154.
16. Garg A.X., Adhikari N.K., McDonald H., Rosas-Arellano M.P., Devereaux P.J., Beyene J., Sam J., Haynes R.B. Effects of computerized clinical decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2005, 293(10):1223-1238.
17. Durieux P., Trinquart L., Colombet I., Niès J., Walton R., Rajeswaran A., Rège Walther M., Harvey E., Burnand B. Computerized advice on drug dosage to improve prescribing practice. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2008, (3):CD002894.
18. Judge J., Field T.S., DeFlorio M., et al. Prescribers' response to alerts during medication ordering in the long term care setting. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2006, 13(4):385-390.
19. van Doormaal J.E., van den Bernt P.M.L.A., Zaal R.J., et al. The influence that electronic prescribing has on medication errors and preventable adverse drug events. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2009, 16:816-825.
20. Avery A.J., Rodgers S., Cantrill J.A., Armstrong S., Cresswell K., Eden M., Elliott R.A., Howard R., et al. A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet 2012, 379(9823):1319-1320.
21. Lee J.D., Moray N. Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics 1992, 35:1243-1270.
22. Dreiseitl S., Binder M. Do physicians value decision support? A look at the effect of decision support systems on physician opinion. Artif. Intell. Med. 2005, 33:25-30.
23. Lee Z., Wagner C., Shin H.K. The effect of decision support system expertise on system use behaviour and performance. Inform. Manage. 2008, 45(6):349-358.
24. Bin G. Moderating effects of task characteristics on information source use: an individual level analysis of R&D professionals in new product development. J. Inf. Sci. 2009, 35(5):527-547.
25. Arnold V., Sutton S.G. The theory of technology dominance: understanding the impact of intelligent decision aids on decision makers' judgments. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research 1998, vol. 1:175-194. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
26. Moray N., Inagaki T., Itoh M. Adaptive automation, trust, and self-confidence in fault management of time-critical tasks. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 2000, 6(1):44-58.
27. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174.
28. Chinburapa V., Larson L.N., Brucks M., Draugalis J., Bootman J.L., Puto C.P. Physician prescribing decisions: the effects of situational involvement and task complexity on information acquisition and decision making. Soc. Sci. Med. 1993, 36(11):82-1473.
29. Price P.C., Stone E.R. Intuitive evaluation of likelihood judgment producers: evidence for a confidence heuristic. J. Behav. Decis. Making 2004, 17:39-57.
30. de Vries P., Midden C., Bouwhuis D. The effects of errors on system trust, self-confidence, and the allocation of control in route planning. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2003, 58(6):719-735.
31. Wu J.H., Shen W.S., Lin L.M., Greenes R., Bates D.W. Testing the technology acceptance model for evaluating healthcare professionals' intention to use an adverse event reporting system. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2008, 20(2):123-129.