ArticlePloS one2025
Future pharmacy practitioners' insights towards integration of artificial intelligence in healthcare education: Preliminary findings from Karachi, Pakistan.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence (AI) for social innovation in health education: promoting health literacy through personalized ai-driven learning tools - a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of the perceived Artificial Intelligence Literacy Questionnaire-6 (PAILQ-6) in Arabic-speaking pharmacists: A cross-sectional methodological study.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Familiarity, attitude and practice of postgraduate health science students of Pakistan regarding the implication of artificial intelligence in research: an analytical survey.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Emerging advancements and expanding technological scope of education and practices in pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences.BioImpacts : BI · 2026Review
- Bridging the gap between AI and traditional teaching methods in medical education: opportunities, challenges, and solutions.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Accuracy and teachability of artificial intelligence chatbots in solving pharmaceutical calculations: a descriptive study.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In an evolutionary era of medical education, "Artificial intelligence" (AI) is applied to replicate human intellect, encompassing abilities, logical reasoning and effective problem-solving skills. Previous research has explored the attitude of medical and dental students, toward the assimilation of AI in medicine; however, a significant gap exists in appraising the understanding and concerns of pharmacy students. Therefore, the current study was designed to explore undergraduate pharmacy students' perceptions of integrating AI into education and practice.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among final-year pharmacy students from different public and private sector universities in Karachi. The sample size on 60% anticipated response rate and 99% CI was calculated to be 390. Data was collected after acquiring ethical approval using convenient sampling. Frequency and percentage of the socio-demographic features were analyzed and then goodness of fit and Pearson's chi-squared test of correlation was applied. Results were considered significant when p < 0.05.
resultsThe overall response rate of the study was 67%. More than 80% of the respondents were female. The students 35% (n = 202) strongly agreed and 59% (n = 334) agreed that AI plays an important role in healthcare, (χ2 = 505.6, p < 0.001). Around 79% (n = 453, χ2 = 384.3, p < 0.001) of students agreed on the replacement of patient care specialties with AI in the future, whereas 495 students (87%, χ2 = 682.3, p < 0.001) stated that they possess a strong comprehension of the fundamental principles governing the operation of AI. More than 80% of the students were comfortable in using AI terminologies (n = 475, χ2 = 598, p < 0.001) and 93% (n = 529, χ2 = 290, p < 0.001) were sure that AI inclusion in pharmacy education will develop a positive influence into the pharmacy curriculum (95%, n = 549, χ2 = 566.9, p < 0.001). A high and positive correlation was observed between the perception and willingness of students to adopt the AI changes in teaching undergraduate students (ρ = 0.491, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the outcomes showed students at private-sector universities stood out in computer literacy compared to public-sector universities (χ2 = 6.546, p < 0.05).
conclusionThe current outcomes revealed the higher willingness of pharmacy students towards AI-infused learning. They understood the prerequisite of having both formal and informal learning experiences on the clinical application, technological constraints, and ethical considerations of the AI tools to be successful in this endeavor. The policymakers must take action to ensure that future pharmacists have a strong foundation of AI literacy and take initiatives to foster the interests and abilities of imminent pharmacists who will spearhead innovation in the field.
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.