BACKGROUND:Public perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare have been found to be generally favorable if specific areas of concern are addressed. This exploratory survey aimed to elicit levels of comfort, perceived utility, and concern among people with and without chronic health conditions across a range of healthcare, health training, and health research scenarios. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:A cross-sectional survey was conducted with adults based in the United Kingdom. Quantitative data were presented using descriptive statistics, and non-parametric tests were used to detect differences between scenarios and the influence of sociodemographic characteristics. Free-text responses were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS:Study participants had a mean age of 49.04 years (range 19-92) and were predominantly male (57.14%). The sample contained people with (49.07%) and without (50.93%) chronic health conditions. Most participants reported they were comfortable in each scenario (56.5-71.4%), found AI to be useful (60.2-73.3%), and indicated they were only slightly or not at all concerned (59.6-70.2%). CONCLUSIONS:This study found that AI is broadly acceptable to the public across a variety of different healthcare and health research scenarios. Future research should build on these exploratory findings to interrogate the acceptability of AI across different contexts and over time.
BACKGROUND:Zanubrutinib has demonstrated superior efficacy and safety over ibrutinib for Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) in the phase 3 ASPEN trial, but its cost-effectiveness in China remains unknown. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of zanubrutinib versus ibrutinib as first-line treatment for WM from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. METHODS:A three-state partitioned survival model (progression-free, progressive disease, death) was developed over a 15-year horizon using ASPEN trial data. Survival was extrapolated using parametric models and adjusted by relative survival. Direct medical costs were sourced from Chinese databases. ICERs were calculated using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $37,849/QALY (three times China's 2023 GDP per capita). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS:Zanubrutinib resulted in an incremental gain of 0.084 QALYs at a cost saving of $26,768 per patient compared with ibrutinib, yielding an ICER of -$318,719/QALY. The negative ICER indicates that zanubrutinib is both more effective and cost-saving (i.e. a dominant strategy) relative to ibrutinib. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. CONCLUSION:Under current Chinese pricing and healthcare system conditions, zanubrutinib is a cost-effective and dominant alternative to ibrutinib for first-line treatment of WM.
