ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Medical Students' Perceptions of Large Language Models in Healthcare: A Multinational Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Medical Students' Attitudes, Perceptions, and Self-Reported Familiarity With AI in Health Care: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Evaluating the clinical decision-making performance of large language models in clinically oriented thoracic anatomy scenarios: a comparative evaluation study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- From Novelty to Necessity: Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
- Exploring Medical Students' Perceptions Regarding ChatGPT and AI Studying at the University of Niš: A Study on Usage, Attitudes, and Linguistic Influence-Single-Centered Study in Serbia-A Paradoxical Ally?Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs), are potential tools for enhancing healthcare delivery and clinical research. Presently, there is a scarcity of research regarding the viewpoints of medical students toward LLMs. This study aims to explore the perceptions of LLMs and their applications among this demographic. Methods: A cross-sectional study was done using an online survey. It was designed using Google Forms and circulated from July 2023 to August 2023. The target population included medical students from Ecuador, Ethiopia, India, Mauritius, Pakistan, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and the United States (USA). Results: A total of 1180 responses were collected from 10 medical colleges across 7 countries. The UAE had the largest number of responses (31.7%), followed by Ecuador (17.6%), and Mauritius (13.7%). And 77.4% respondents were already aware about LLMs before attempting the survey, most popularly, ChatGPT. Participants were most familiar with the specific use of LLMs in research (46%), and the lowest familiarity was seen in the use of LLMs in healthcare (37%). More than half of the participants (52%) support the use of LLMs healthcare, yet a significant number of them remained neutral (37%) or disagreed (31%) on LLMs being safe in this context. Conclusion: While most of the medical students are aware of LLMs and their applications, the multinational survey demonstrated hesitancy among medical students in fully adopting LLMs into healthcare practice and clinical research. This study prompts further exploration of medical students' attitudes and acceptance concerning the integration of LLMs for research methodologies, ethical considerations, and healthcare practice.
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.