ArticleBMC health services research2023
Opinion research among Russian Physicians on the application of technologies using artificial intelligence in the field of medicine and health care.
Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- "First, do no harm" in the digital era: examining the practicality of the European Health Data Space proposal and ethical implications of artificial intelligence: A systematic literature review.BMC medical ethics · 2026Pooled it
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on artificial intelligence in patient care: a systematic review of hindering and facilitating factors on different levels.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- Receptiveness of physicians towards artificial intelligence-driven drug prescription: a nationwide survey.npj health systems · 2026Article
- Exploring Medical Doctors' Confidence in Artificial Intelligence: The Role of Specialty, Experience, and Perceived Job Security.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Health Care Professionals' Concerns About Medical AI and Psychological Barriers and Strategies for Successful Implementation: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Role of artificial intelligence in pediatric intensive care: a survey of healthcare staff perspectives in Saudi Arabia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Article
- Exploring the perspectives of healthcare professionals regarding artificial intelligence; acceptance and challenges.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Perceptions of Surgeons in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq Regarding the Use of Artificial Intelligence.Cureus · 2024Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: A Study of Physician Attitudes and Perceptions in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.Cureus · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: Awareness, Perceptions, and Future Perspectives of Palestinian Medical Students and Physicians.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo date, no opinion surveys has been conducted among Russian physicians to study their awareness about artificial intelligence. With a survey, we aimed to evaluate the attitudes of stakeholders to the usage of technologies employing AI in the field of medicine and healthcare and identify challenges and perspectives to introducing AI.
methodsWe conducted a 12-question online survey using Google Forms. The survey consisted of questions related to the recognition of AI and attitudes towards it, the direction of development of AI in medicine and the possible risks of using AI in medicine.
results301 doctors took part in the survey. 107 (35.6%) responded that they are familiar with AI. The vast majority of participants considered AI useful in the medical field (85%). The advantage of AI was associated with the ability to analyze huge volumes of clinically relevant data in real time (79%). Respondents highlighted areas where AI would be most useful-organizational optimization (74%), biopharmaceutical research (67%), and disease diagnosis (52%). Among the possible problems when using AI, they noted the lack of flexibility and limited application on controversial issues (64% and 60% of respondents). 56% believe that AI decision making will be difficult if inadequate information is presented for analysis. A third of doctors fear that specialists with little experience took part in the development of AI, and 89% of respondents believe that doctors should participate in the development of AI for medicine and healthcare. Only 20 participants (6.6%) responded that they agree that AI can replace them at work. At the same time, 76% of respondents believe that in the future, doctors using AI will replace those who do not.
conclusionsRussian doctors are for AI in medicine. Most of the respondents believe that AI will not replace them in the future and will become a useful tool. First of all, for optimizing organizational processes, research and diagnostics of diseases.
trial registrationThis study was approved by the Local Ethics Committee of the Lomonosov Moscow State University Medical Research and Education Center (IRB00010587).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.