ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2024
Clinician Perceptions of Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools and Clinical Workflows: Potential Uses, Motivations for Adoption, and Sentiments on Impact.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2024. 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.
- Assessing pediatric gastroenterologists' use of artificial intelligence in clinical and professional tasks.JPGN reports · 2026Article
- The dark side of Gen-AI-assisted clinical work collaboration: work alienation, trait emotional intelligence, and instigated interprofessional incivility.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Shifting Information Needs in Clinical Practice: The Evolving Role of Generative AI in Addressing Clinician Demands for Context-Specific Knowledge.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024Article
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
Successful integration of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) into healthcare requires understanding of health professionals' perspectives, ideally through data-driven approaches. In this study, we use a semi-structured survey and mixed methods analyses to explore clinicians' perceptions on the utility of generative AI for all types of clinical tasks, familiarity and competency with generative AI tools, and sentiments regarding the potential impact of generative AI on healthcare. Analysis of 116 clinician responses found differing perceptions regarding the usefulness of generative AI across clinical workflows, with information gathering from external sources rated highest and communication rated lowest. Clinician-generated prompt suggestions focused most often on clinician decision making and were of mixed quality, with participants more familiar with generative AI suggesting more high-quality prompts. Sentiments regarding the impact of generative AI varied, particularly regarding trustworthiness and impact on bias. Thematic analysis of open-ended comments highlighted concerns about patient care and the role of clinicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40417507PMC12099363What 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.