ArticleCureus2023
Surveying Hematologists' Perceptions and Readiness to Embrace Artificial Intelligence in Diagnosis and Treatment Decision-Making.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The I-KAPCAM-AI-Q: a novel instrument for evaluating health care providers' AI awareness in Italy.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applicability in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Present Perspectives and Future Formations.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThis study aims to explore the critical dimension of assessing the perceptions and readiness of hematologists to embrace artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in their diagnostic and treatment decision-making processes.
methodsThis study used a cross-sectional design for collecting data related to the perceptions and readiness of hematologists using a validated online questionnaire-based survey. Both hematologists (MD) and postgraduate MD students in hematology were included in the study. A total of 188 participants, including 35 hematologists (MD) and 153 MD hematology students, completed the survey.
resultsMajor challenges include "AI's level of autonomy" and "the complexity in the field of medicine." Major barriers and risks identified include "lack of trust," "management's level of understanding," "dehumanization of healthcare," and "reduction in physicians' skills." Statistically significant differences in perceptions of benefits including resources (p=0.0326, p<0.05) and knowledge (p=0.0262, p<0.05) were observed between genders. Older physicians were observed to be more concerned about the use of AI compared to younger physicians (p<0.05).
conclusionWhile AI use in hematology diagnosis and treatment decision-making is positively perceived, issues such as lack of trust, transparency, regulations, and poor AI awareness can affect the adoption of AI.
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.