ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2024
Medical doctor's perception of artificial intelligence during the COVID-19 era: A mixed methods study.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Adoption, Adaptation, Assimilation, and Use in the United States.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Physicians' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Mixed Methods Survey and Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Exploring the role of moxibustion robots in teaching: a cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Physicians' attitudes and acceptance towards artificial intelligence in medical care: a qualitative study in Germany.Frontiers in digital health · 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
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) has led to the development of various opportunities during the COVID-19 pandemic. An abundant number of applications have surfaced responding to the pandemic, while some other applications were futile. Objectives: The present study aimed to assess the perception and opportunities of AI used during the COVID-19 pandemic and to explore the perception of medical data analysts about the inclusion of AI in medical education. Material and Methods: This study adopted a mixed-method research design conducted among medical doctors for the quantitative part while including medical data analysts for the qualitative interview. Results: The study reveals that nearly 64.8% of professionals were working in high COVID-19 patient-load settings and had significantly more acceptance of AI tools compared to others ( Conclusion: Notwithstanding that the majority of professionals are aware that public health emergency creates a significant strain on doctors, the majority still have to work in extremely high case load setting to demand solutions. AI applications are still not being integrated into medicine as fast as technology has been advancing. Sensitization workshops can be conducted among specialists to develop interest which will encourage them to identify problem statements in their fields, and along with AI experts, they can create AI-enabled algorithms to address the problems. A lack of educational opportunities about AI in formal medical curriculum was identified.
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.