{
  "id": 5647501,
  "title": "People affected by cancer need a stronger voice in shaping generative AI for oncology, review finds",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/09/04/people-affected-by-cancer-need-a-stronger-voice-in-shaping-generative",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-09-04T21:20:01.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Medical Xpress",
    "slug": "medical-xpress",
    "url": "https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-09-people-affected-cancer-stronger-voice.html"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "A review of studies on generative AI in oncology revealed a concerning lack of input from cancer patients, survivors, and caregivers, who could provide valuable insights for designing and implementing AI tools tailored to their needs. Researchers from Flinders University analyzed 2,441 records and found that only 32 studies examined the perspectives of those affected by cancer. While most studies focused on providing cancer information and simplifying clinical reports, they missed opportunities to explore other potential uses of generative AI in cancer care.\n\nDr. Bradley Menz, a research fellow at Flinders University, emphasized that designing AI for patients is different from designing it with patients in mind. He stressed that if these tools are to influence cancer care, patients, survivors, and caregivers must have a significant role in shaping their design, governance, and use.\n\nThe review also highlighted that previous studies rarely assessed important aspects of generative AI engagement, such as patients' willingness to use AI, concerns about privacy, alignment with expectations, and familiarity. Trust in generative AI was often dependent on personalized, emotionally appropriate, and accurate responses. However, accountability was only examined in three of the 32 studies, and no studies assessed safety, transparency, equity, or human autonomy.\n\nAssociate Professor Ashley Hopkins from Flinders University pointed out that future research should assess perspectives on a broader range of concepts, including accountability, safety, transparency, equity, and human autonomy. The current literature mainly focused on comprehension, usefulness, relevance, trust, accuracy, and clarity.\n\nThe researchers hope that their review will pave the way for more specific and detailed examinations of generative AI in oncology, taking into account the perspectives of those affected by cancer. By involving patients, survivors, and caregivers in the design and governance of AI tools, it is hoped that these tools will be more effective, trustworthy, and acceptable to the cancer community.",
  "summary": "Flinders University researchers were part of an international team that conducted a scoping review that identified 2,441 records and found that just 32 studies examined how cancer patients, survivors and caregivers feel about generative AI being used in their care. The study is published in the European Journal of Cancer.",
  "key_points": [
    "Cancer patients, survivors, and caregivers lack voice in AI design, review finds",
    "Only 32 studies examined perspectives of cancer-affected individuals",
    "Future research should assess accountability, safety, transparency, equity, and autonomy"
  ],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}