ArticlePloS one2023
American public opinion on artificial intelligence in healthcare.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Impact and Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Healthcare: Systematic Review.Current topics in medicinal chemistry · 2025Pooled it
- Psychological and Contextual Factors of AI Acceptance Among Informal Caregivers of People Living With Dementia: Cross-Sectional Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Exploring Informal Caregivers' Perception of the Olera Digital Caregiving Assistance Platform for Dementia Care: Mixed Methods Evaluation Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Patient attitudes toward artificial intelligence in Jordanian Healthcare: A cross-sectional survey study.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- The readiness-anxiety paradox in artificial intelligence adoption among nursing students: a multidimensional regression analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Public Health Education: A Scoping Review of Workforce Competency Development.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Patient Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Orthopaedic Surgery: Identifying Potential Barriers to Acceptance and Disparities With Implementation.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026Article
- IsAI & society · 2026Article
- Public perceptions of AI in healthcare: a large-scale BERTopic and sentiment analysis of Reddit discussions.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The double-edged sword of generative AI in dermatology: a multi-component cross-sectional study on physician burnout, patient satisfaction, and communication quality.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- AI Health Literacy: a reflective framework for LLM-based generative AI in public health education and promotion.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Community perspectives on health AI: hopes, concerns and implications for health systems and trustworthy AI.AI and ethics · 2026Article
- Development and Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Social Perception of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Scale in the Turkish Context: Evidence From Hatay Province.International journal of public health · 2026Article
- Feeling powerful and less emotional: how sense of power reduces aversion to AI services.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Investigating the needs of older adults with type 2 diabetes and conceptualizing a healthy diet management application: a conceptual design.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Exploring Opportunities and Challenges of AI in Primary Healthcare: A Qualitative Study with Family Doctors in Lithuania.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Traumatic Brain Injury and Artificial Intelligence: Shaping the Future of Neurorehabilitation-A Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Machine learning-based prediction models in medical decision-making in kidney disease: patient, caregiver, and clinician perspectives on trust and appropriate use.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Billions of dollars are being invested into developing medical artificial intelligence (AI) systems and yet public opinion of AI in the medical field seems to be mixed. Although high expectations for the future of medical AI do exist in the American public, anxiety and uncertainty about what it can do and how it works is widespread. Continuing evaluation of public opinion on AI in healthcare is necessary to ensure alignment between patient attitudes and the technologies adopted. We conducted a representative-sample survey (total N = 203) to measure the trust of the American public towards medical AI. Primarily, we contrasted preferences for AI and human professionals to be medical decision-makers. Additionally, we measured expectations for the impact and use of medical AI in the future. We present four noteworthy results: (1) The general public strongly prefers human medical professionals make medical decisions, while at the same time believing they are more likely to make culturally biased decisions than AI. (2) The general public is more comfortable with a human reading their medical records than an AI, both now and "100 years from now." (3) The general public is nearly evenly split between those who would trust their own doctor to use AI and those who would not. (4) Respondents expect AI will improve medical treatment but more so in the distant future than immediately.
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.