Abstract
This study examines the acceptance of artificial intelligence (AI)-based diagnostic alternatives compared to traditional biological testing through a randomized scenario experiment in the domain of neurodegenerative diseases (NDs). A total of 3225 pairwise choices of ND risk-prediction tools were offered to participants, with 1482 choices comparing AI with the biological saliva test and 1743 comparing AI+ with the saliva test (with AI+ using digital consumer data, in addition to electronic medical data). Overall, only 36.68% of responses showed preferences for AI/AI+ alternatives. Stratified by AI sensitivity levels, acceptance rates for AI/AI+ were 35.04% at 60% sensitivity and 31.63% at 70% sensitivity, and increased markedly to 48.68% at 95% sensitivity (p <0.01). Similarly, acceptance rates by specificity were 29.68%, 28.18%, and 44.24% at 60%, 70%, and 95% specificity, respectively (P < 0.01). Notably, AI consistently garnered higher acceptance rates (45.82%) than AI+ (28.92%) at comparable sensitivity and specificity levels, except at 60% sensitivity, where no significant difference was observed. These results highlight the nuanced preferences for AI diagnostics, with higher sensitivity and specificity significantly driving acceptance of AI diagnostics.