ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Exploring Parental Experiences of Childhood Ear Health Clinics and Their Acceptability of AI-Based Diagnostic Tools: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring Parental Experiences of Childhood Ear Health Clinics and Their Acceptability of AI-Based Diagnostic Tools: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveArtificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) algorithms will transform the childhood otitis media (OM) diagnostic experience. However, there is limited data on parents' current experiences within clinical settings, limited research exploring AI/ML acceptability among consumers generally, and none regarding consumer perspectives on its use for childhood OM. This study aimed to explore current parental experiences of, as well as their perspectives on the use of AI/ML in, clinical care for OM in children.
designWe conducted and thematically analysed semi-structured interviews with parents of children seen for OM within the ENT or audiology departments of an Australian urban teaching hospital.
findingsSeven themes were identified: (1) Meeting children's needs; (2) Challenges in accessing and waiting for audiology and ENT care; (3) Urban versus rural healthcare experience; (4) Public versus private health system; (5) Strategies for enhancing paediatric audiology services; (6) Perceived benefits of AI/ML in ear disease diagnosis; and (7) Concerns and considerations regarding AI/ML in ear health diagnosis.
conclusionsParents have concerns about the use and development of AI/ML tools, but also acknowledge the potential benefits of such tools for healthcare delivery. Currently, the understanding amongst parents of AIAI/ML/ML tools for OM diagnosis was limited, and more education on the use and development of AIAI/ML/ML for OM is warranted. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We did not involve patients or the public in the design of this study. However, three authors have lived experience as parents of children who have had recurrent ear infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.