ArticleEuropean journal of investigation in health, psychology and education2025
Unlocking Patient Resistance to AI in Healthcare: A Psychological Exploration.
Article in European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Telemedicine and artificial intelligence in family medicine practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis of barriers and enablers in routine primary care.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- A concept analysis of artificial intelligence anxiety among nurses based on Walker and Avant's method.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- AI-Enhanced Conversational Agents for Personalized Asthma Support in People With Asthma: Factors for Engagement, Value, and Efficacy in a Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Obesity Risk Prediction and Management: Approaches, Insights, and Recommendations.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed healthcare, yet patients' acceptance of AI-driven medical services remains constrained. Despite its significant potential, patients exhibit reluctance towards this technology. A notable lack of comprehensive research exists that examines the variables driving patients' resistance to AI. This study explores the variables influencing patients' resistance to adopt AI technology in healthcare by applying an extended Ram and Sheth Model. More specifically, this research examines the roles of the need for personal contact (NPC), perceived technological dependence (PTD), and general skepticism toward AI (GSAI) in shaping patient resistance to AI integration. For this reason, a sequential mixed-method approach was employed, beginning with semi-structured interviews to identify adaptable factors in healthcare. It then followed with a survey to validate the qualitative findings through Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) via AMOS (version 24). The findings confirm that NPC, PTD, and GSAI significantly contribute to patient resistance to AI in healthcare. Precisely, patients who prefer personal interaction, feel dependent on AI, or are skeptical of AI's promises are more likely to resist its adoption. The findings highlight the psychological factors driving patient reluctance toward AI in healthcare, offering valuable insights for healthcare administrators. Strategies to balance AI's efficiency with human interaction, mitigate technological dependence, and foster trust are recommended for successful implementation of AI. This research adds to the theoretical understanding of Innovation Resistance Theory, providing both conceptual insights and practical implications for the effective incorporation of AI in healthcare.
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.