Turn on cookies to sign in
Signing in saves your progress to your Curie account. We can only do that with cookies on — turn them on to continue.
Ambient AI scribes are winning over oncologists, even if the efficiency gains aren't fully showing up in the numbers yet. A prospective survey at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center found that 73% of clinicians who used the tool would recommend it to colleagues. Researchers say more study is needed to understand its full impact in the uniquely complex world of cancer care.
Ambient AI scribes are earning high marks from oncologists — but the hard data on efficiency is lagging behind the enthusiasm. A prospective survey conducted at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) and presented at the ASCO Quality Care Symposium found that while overall adoption was lower than expected (just under 20% of the 958 clinicians surveyed), nearly three-quarters of users said they'd recommend the tool to others.
The study tracked adopters, attempted adopters, and never-users before and after the scribe's rollout in summer 2025. Metrics like after-hours EHR work ("pajama time") and note-closing rates didn't improve dramatically for users — though researchers note that a simultaneous EHR system launch may have muddied the results. One clear win: clinicians reporting high or excessive note-writing burden dropped significantly, from 78% to 60%.
By the Numbers:
Why it matters: Oncology is a uniquely demanding environment — emotionally charged conversations, complex longitudinal data, and multimodal care make it distinct from general medicine, where most AI scribe research has been done. MSK researchers say it's "imperative" to keep studying these tools in specialty settings to ensure benefits outweigh risks for both clinicians and patients.
