ArticleFrontiers in digital health2025
Physicians and AI in healthcare: insights from a mixed-methods study in Poland on adoption and challenges.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI and Its Shifting Roles in the Therapeutic Relationship: Implications for Precision Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Healthcare professionals show high AI enthusiasm but limited knowledge: A cross-sectional study.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- AI knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and willingness to use AI among oncologists in China: a nationwide cross-sectional study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Understanding psychiatrist readiness for AI: a study of access, self-efficacy, trust, and design expectations.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- The anatomy of AI implementation skepticism in Polish healthcare: an explanatory mixed-methods analysis of psychographic barriers among healthcare professionals.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- How hospital accreditation requirements bridge enablers for AI readiness: interpretative analysis of intersections in framework standards.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Generative AI use before medical visits: disclosure-item responses, trust, and care-seeking behaviors in a cross-sectional social-media survey in Poland.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Documentation: A Cross-Sectional Study of Healthcare Professionals.Cureus · 2025Article
- Comparing AI and physician medical advice quality and humanistic care on social media platforms.Digital healthArticle
- AI support in prehospital telemedicine: Perspectives of tele-emergency physicians and ethical considerations.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Understanding healthcare professionals' attitudes towards artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine is crucial for improving patient care and clinical practice. This study combines a systematic review and a survey targeting Polish physicians to explore these attitudes. While many healthcare professionals express enthusiasm and readiness for AI integration, others remain skeptical due to concerns about reliability, ethical implications, and legal accountability. The systematic review highlighted AI's potential benefits, such as improved diagnostic accuracy and workflow efficiency, alongside challenges like data privacy and the need for validation in atypical scenarios. Materials and methods: This study combines insights from a systematic review and a targeted survey to assess healthcare professionals' attitudes toward AI. The survey focused on Polish physicians, a group uniquely positioned to provide insights due to their healthcare system's specific challenges. Results: The survey revealed optimism among Polish physicians (n86), with 68% ready to adopt AI tools, but underscored the necessity of tailored education and clear implementation guidelines. Discussion: This study provides valuable insights into the dual narrative of optimism and skepticism surrounding AI in healthcare, emphasizing the importance of addressing barriers to maximize its benefits globally.
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.