<b>AI-DRIVEN DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN PUBLIC HEALTH ADMINISTRATION</b>

Background: The evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has made it possible to create decision support systems to aid decision-making on timely, verifiable, and fact-based issues of immense importance and accuracy for public health administrators. Even with such interest, there are gaps in scholarly literature concerning the adoption, reliability, validity, and demographics of such systems. Objective: This research aims to analyze the adoption rate, the use of, and the reliability and validity of the decision support systems within the domain of public health, while assessing the demographic and professional differences in their use, and determining the most important predictors for their future adoption. Methods: This research was conducted with the use of quantitative cross-sectional methods to analyze the responses of 314 individuals in the public health domain, holding such positions as policy development, public health practice, healthcare provision, IT and AI analytics, and health data analysis. The participants answered a 20-item questionnaire, designed on a 5-point Likert scale that describes systems as a domain of public health and issues on supportive technologies embedded in public health (usefulness, ease of use, trust, organizational impact, and future readiness). Descriptive statistical framework systems, such as normality check, reliability Prism analysis (Cronbach’s Alpha) for community organization, validity (KMO and Bartlett’s test), and demographic computing (Independent Samples t-test, One-Way ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, Chi-Square test, Pearson correlation, and regression analysis) were employed. Results: The findings confirmed that the dataset was normally distributed with strong reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.87) and validity (KMO = 0.82; Bartlett’s χ² = 245.67, p < 0.001). Group comparison tests showed differences between the groups across gender, roles, and education levels. The inter-item correlation was strong and positive, while regression analysis showed that the most significant predictor of future adoption was trust and transparency (β = 0.42, p < 0.001), followed by perceived usefulness and organizational impact. Conclusion: AI DS DSSs are positively perceived and are expected to enhance the effectiveness of public health administration. The major barriers to adoption are demographic differences, trust, and lack of transparency. Demographic and trust barriers can be overcome with training and role-based approaches aimed at trust building, and they are essential for the successful adoption, sustainable future integration, and public health system performance of AI.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of medical & health sciences review.
Published
2025-09-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.62019/wapqj864
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Healthcare Systems and Public Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.35
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI-DRIVEN DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN PUBLIC HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

Adli Mustafa, Fayyaz Ali Memon, A. M. A. H. Siddiqui, Farhat Ul Ain et al.
1 citations
Journal of medical & health sciences review.
Healthcare Systems and Public Health
1.35
article

AI-DRIVEN DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS IN PUBLIC HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

Adli Mustafa, Fayyaz Ali Memon, A. M. A. H. Siddiqui, Farhat Ul Ain, Fiza Kausar
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Background: The evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has made it possible to create decision support systems to aid decision-making on timely, verifiable, and fact-based issues of immense importance and accuracy for public health administrators. Even with such interest, there are gaps in scholarly literature concerning the adoption, reliability, validity, and demographics of such systems. Objective: This research aims to analyze the adoption rate, the use of, and the reliability and validity of the decision support systems within the domain of public health, while assessing the demographic and professional differences in their use, and determining the most important predictors for their future adoption. Methods: This research was conducted with the use of quantitative cross-sectional methods to analyze the responses of 314 individuals in the public health domain, holding such positions as policy development, public health practice, healthcare provision, IT and AI analytics, and health data analysis. The participants answered a 20-item questionnaire, designed on a 5-point Likert scale that describes systems as a domain of public health and issues on supportive technologies embedded in public health (usefulness, ease of use, trust, organizational impact, and future readiness). Descriptive statistical framework systems, such as normality check, reliability Prism analysis (Cronbach’s Alpha) for community organization, validity (KMO and Bartlett’s test), and demographic computing (Independent Samples t-test, One-Way ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, Chi-Square test, Pearson correlation, and regression analysis) were employed. Results: The findings confirmed that the dataset was normally distributed with strong reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha = 0.87) and validity (KMO = 0.82; Bartlett’s χ² = 245.67, p < 0.001). Group comparison tests showed differences between the groups across gender, roles, and education levels. The inter-item correlation was strong and positive, while regression analysis showed that the most significant predictor of future adoption was trust and transparency (β = 0.42, p < 0.001), followed by perceived usefulness and organizational impact. Conclusion: AI DS DSSs are positively perceived and are expected to enhance the effectiveness of public health administration. The major barriers to adoption are demographic differences, trust, and lack of transparency. Demographic and trust barriers can be overcome with training and role-based approaches aimed at trust building, and they are essential for the successful adoption, sustainable future integration, and public health system performance of AI.

Journal of medical & health sciences review.Vol. 2(3)
Aga Khan University (PK), Institute of Public Health (AL), Faculty of Public Health (GB), Health Services Academy (PK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Healthcare Systems and Public Health
1.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.