Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37674620›Full record

ArticleHealth science reports2023

Evaluation of acceptance, attitude, and knowledge towards artificial intelligence and its application from the point of view of physicians and nurses: A provincial survey study in Iran: A cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study.

Zeinab Hamedani, Mohsen Moradi, Fatemeh Kalroozi, Ali Manafi Anari, Erfan Jalalifar, Arina Ansari, Behzad H Aski, Maryam Nezamzadeh, Bardia Karim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health science reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Zeinab HamedaniDepartment of Midwifery, College of Nursing and Midwifery Karaj Islamic Azad University Karaj Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-6680-1762
Mohsen MoradiDepartment of Psychiatric Nursing, School of Nursing & Midwifery Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences Shahrekord Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-8990-1328
Fatemeh KalrooziDepartment of Pediatric Nursing, College of Nursing Aja University of Medical Sciences Tehran Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-2966-6108
Ali Manafi AnariDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Ali Asghar Children's Hospital Iran University of Medical Science Tehran Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-5199-2343
Erfan JalalifarStudent Research Committee Tabriz University of Medical Sciences Tabriz Iran.ORCID 0000-0001-9371-5379
Arina AnsariStudent Research Committee North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences Bojnurd Iran.ORCID 0000-0003-2625-9603
Behzad H AskiDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, Ali Asghar Children's Hospital Iran University of Medical Science Tehran Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6796-0100
Maryam NezamzadehDepartment of Critical Care Nursing, Faculty of Nursing Aja University of Medical Sciences Tehran Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-4466-5819
Bardia KarimStudent Research Committee Babol University of Medical Sciences Babol Mazandaran Iran.ORCID 0000-0002-2037-4056
Aja University of Medical Sciences · IRIran University of Medical Sciences · IRBabol University of Medical Sciences · IRIslamic Azad University, Karaj · IRNorth Khorasan University of Medical Sciences · IRShahrekord University of Medical Sciences · IRTabriz University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Aims: The prospect of using artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare is bright and promising, and its use can have a significant impact on cost reduction and decrease the possibility of error and negligence among healthcare workers. This study aims to investigate the level of knowledge, attitude, and acceptance among Iranian physicians and nurses. Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study was conducted in eight public university hospitals located in Tehran on 400 physicians and nurses. To conduct the study, convenient sampling was used with the help of researcher-made questionnaires. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS 21 The mean and standard deviation and Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used. Results: In this study, the level of knowledge among the research subjects was average (14.66 ± 4.53), the level of their attitude toward AI was relatively favorable (47.81 ± 6.74), and their level of acceptance of AI was average (103.19 ± 13.70). Moreover, from the participant's perspective, AI in medicine is most widely used in increasing the accuracy of diagnostic tests (86.5%), identifying drug interactions (82.75%), and helping to analyze medical tests and imaging (80%). There was a statistically significant relationship between the variable of acceptance of AI and the participant's level of education ( Conclusion: In this study, both the knowledge and the acceptance of the participants towards AI were proved to be at an average level and the attitude towards AI was relatively favorable, which is in contrast with the very rapid and inevitable expansion of AI. Although our participants were aware of the growing use of AI in medicine, they had a cautious attitude toward this.

Indexed as

acceptanceartificial intelligenceattitudehealthcare workersknowledge

Identifiers

PMID37674620
PMCPMC10477406
OpenAlexW4386460568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.