Journals / Anatolian Current Medical Journal / 2026 / Volume: 8 Issue: 4

The impact of digital health technology use on oncology-specific clinical guideline adherence among medical oncologists in Turkiye

Zekeriya Hannarici(University of Health Sciences, Bursa City Education and Research Hospital)0000-0002-6547-0199
Aykut Turhan(ORDU ÜNİVERSİTESİ İÇ HASTALIKLARI ANA BİLİM DALI , TIBBİ ONKOLOJİ BİLİM DALI)0000-0002-2535-9816
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-07-16
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These findings highlight the need for transparent, guideline-aligned AI systems and structured education for their integration into oncology practice.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: Evidence-based guidelines standardize care; however, their expanding scope may hinder the consistent implementation of these guidelines.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 94 medical oncologists completed a structured, Likert-scale questionnaire.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These findings highlight the need for transparent, guideline-aligned AI systems and structured education for their integration into oncology practice.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Artificial Intelligence · medical oncology · clinical decision-making

Abstract

Aims: Evidence-based guidelines standardize care; however, their expanding scope may hinder the consistent implementation of these guidelines. However, the impact of digital health and Artificial Intelligence (AI) on guideline adherence and clinician perspectives remains unclear. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 94 medical oncologists completed a structured, Likert-scale questionnaire. Statistical analyses included Spearman’s correlation and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess associations between variables, followed by multivariate linear regression to identify the independent predictors of AI perception. Results: Digital health technologies were frequently used (64.9%), and 76.6% of the participants reported that these tools accelerated the decision-making process. Of the participants, 31.9% indicated that decision-making would be more difficult without AI. Guideline adherence was notably high (94.7%), with over 75% supporting its role in personalized decision-making and integration of complex patient-specific factors, while 59.6% found it useful in data-limited clinical scenarios. The most commonly identified application areas were toxicity management (75.5%) and treatment selection (71.3%). Trust in AI was strongly associated with its alignment with established guidelines (91.5%), and most participants emphasized that AI should support clinical judgment within ethical and legal frameworks. In the multivariate analysis, future perspective emerged as the only independent predictor of AI perception (β=0.353). Conclusion: Medical oncologists demonstrated high guideline adherence and cautiously positive attitudes toward AI. Trust in AI is closely tied to guideline compatibility, and future expectations significantly shape AI acceptance. These findings highlight the need for transparent, guideline-aligned AI systems and structured education for their integration into oncology practice.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hannarici, Z., Turhan, A. (2026). The impact of digital health technology use on oncology-specific clinical guideline adherence among medical oncologists in Turkiye. Anatolian Current Medical Journal, Volume: 8 Issue: 4. https://doi.org/10.38053/acmj.1943411

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (24)

  1. Kann BH, Johnson SB, Aerts H, Mak RH, Nguyen PL. Changes in length and complexity of clinical practice guidelines in oncology, 1996-2019. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(3):e200841. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.0841
  2. Cufer T, Kosty MP. ESMO/ASCO recommendations for a global curriculum in medical oncology edition 2023. JCO Glob Oncol. 2023;9: e2300277. doi:10.1200/go.23.00277
  3. Ismaila N, Mbuagbaw L, Ma J, Thabane L. Clinical practice guidelines adherence and the impact on health outcomes in oncology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Public Health Guidel. 2025;2(3):e70030. doi:10.1002/gin2.70030
  4. Bierbaum M, Rapport F, Arnolda G, et al. Clinicians' attitudes and perceived barriers and facilitators to cancer treatment clinical practice guideline adherence: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative literature. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):39. doi:10.1186/s13012-020-00991-3
  5. Bora AM, Piechotta V, Kreuzberger N, et al. The effectiveness of clinical guideline implementation strategies in oncology-a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):347. doi:10.1186/s12913-023-09189-x
  6. Aapro M, Bossi P, Dasari A, et al. Digital health for optimal supportive care in oncology: benefits, limits, and future perspectives. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(10):4589-4612. doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05539-1
  7. Dicker AP, Jim HSL. Intersection of digital health and oncology. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2018;2:1-4. doi:10.1200/cci.18.00070
  8. Mandó P, Moutafi M, Connolly EA, et al. Digital health technology in oncology: results from a survey by the ESMO Young Oncologists Committee and medical student alumni. ESMO Real World Data Digit Oncol. 2026;12:100697. doi:10.1016/j.esmorw.2026.100697
  9. Patel S, Goldsack JC, Cordovano G, et al. Advancing digital health innovation in oncology: priorities for high-value digital transformation in cancer care. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e43404. doi:10.2196/43404
  10. Froicu E-M, Creangă-Murariu I, Afrăsânie V-A, et al. Artificial Intelligence and decision-making in oncology: a review of ethical, legal, and informed consent challenges. Curr Oncol Rep. 2025;27(8):1002-1012. doi:10.1007/s11912-025-01698-8
  11. Kumar KS, Miskovic V, Blasiak A, et al. Artificial Intelligence in clinical oncology: from data to digital pathology and treatment. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2023;(43):e390084. doi:10.1200/edbk_390084
  12. Xu F, Sepúlveda MJ, Jiang Z, et al. Effect of an Artificial Intelligence clinical decision support system on treatment decisions for complex breast cancer. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2020;4:824-838. doi:10.1200/cci.20.00018
  13. Olawade DB, Fidelis SC, Marinze S, Egbon E, Osunmakinde A, Osborne A. Artificial Intelligence in clinical trials: a comprehensive review of opportunities, challenges, and future directions. Int J Med Inform. 2026; 206:106141. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2025.106141
  14. Cooney-Waterhouse T, Ou W, Mukherji S, Frytak J, Saha P, Waterhouse D. Bridging the trust gap in Artificial Intelligence for health care: lessons from clinical oncology. AI in Precision Oncology. 2025;2(3):85-91. doi:10.1089/aipo.2025.0001
  15. Hantel A, Walsh TP, Marron JM, et al. Perspectives of oncologists on the ethical implications of using Artificial Intelligence for cancer care. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(3):e244077. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.4077
  16. Hesso I, Kayyali R, Dolton DR, et al. Cancer care at the time of the fourth industrial revolution: an insight to healthcare professionals' perspectives on cancer care and Artificial Intelligence. Radiat Oncol. 2023;18(1):167. doi:10.1186/s13014-023-02351-z
  17. Giavina-Bianchi M, Amaro E Jr, Machado BS. Medical expectations of physicians on AI solutions in daily practice: cross-sectional survey study. JMIRx Med. 2024;5:e50803. doi:10.2196/50803
  18. Heins M, De Jong J, Spronk I, Ho V, Brink M, Korevaar J. Adherence to cancer treatment guidelines: influence of general and cancer-specific guideline characteristics. Eur J Cancer. 2017;72:S115. doi:10.1016/S0959-8049(17)30458-6
  19. Schulz PJ, Kee KM, Lwin MO, et al. Clinical experience and perception of risk affect the acceptance and trust of using AI in medicine. Front Digit Health. 2025;7:1620127. doi:10.3389/fdgth.2025.1620127
  20. Zhai H, Yang X, Xue J, et al. Radiation oncologists’ perceptions of adopting an Artificial Intelligence-assisted contouring technology: model development and questionnaire study. J Med Internet Res. 2021; 023(9):e27122. doi:10.2196/27122
  21. Thind BS, Tsao CK. Artificial Intelligence in oncology: promise, peril, and the future of patient-physician interaction. Front Digit Health. 2025; 7:1633577. doi:10.3389/fdgth.2025.1633577
  22. Katznelson G, Chan B. What does Artificial Intelligence mean for oncologists? Univ West Ont Med J. 2021;89(1). doi:10.5206/uwomj.v89i1.9365
  23. Heudel PE, Crochet H, Blay JY. Impact of Artificial Intelligence in transforming the doctor-cancer patient relationship. ESMO Real World Data Digit Oncol. 2024;3:100026. doi:10.1016/j.esmorw.2024.100026
  24. Vijayakumar S, Lee VV, Leong QY, Hong SJ, Blasiak A, Ho D. Physicians’ perspectives on AI in clinical decision support systems: interview study of the CURATE. AI personalized dose optimization platform. JMIR Hum Factors. 2023;10:e48476. doi:10.2196/48476