Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40917814›Full record

ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2025

Knowledge Attitudes and Ethical Concerns About Artificial Intelligence Among Medical Students at Taibah University: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Samah Alfahl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Samah AlfahlDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0009-0005-6649-6285

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly relevant tool to medical education and healthcare. Understanding the readiness of future physicians for AI integration is essential for developing effective curricula and fostering responsible use of this technology. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 189 medical students at Taibah University using a validated, self-administered online questionnaire. The tool measured AI knowledge (7 items), attitudes (10 items), practices (7 items), and perceived barriers. Responses were captured on a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive and inferential statistics, including one-way ANOVA, were used to analyze differences across academic years. Results: Out of 189 respondents, 53.97% (n=102) of students reported familiarity with basic AI concepts, and 5.66% (n=11) were aware of machine learning and deep learning. Only 11.21% (n=21) had received formal AI instruction, and 21.18% (n=40) had attended dedicated courses. 74.60% (n=141) believed AI would revolutionize education, yet 41.91% (n=79) expressed concerns about AI replacing teachers. 52.02% (n=98) used AI regularly for exam preparation. In comparison, only 11.64% (n=22) used it for Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) preparation Key barriers included ethical concerns (n=44 responses), risk of plagiarism (n=56), lack of knowledge (n=46), and limited access to tools (n=28). Conclusion: Medical students display cautious optimism about AI in education, with limited practical knowledge and concerns about ethical implications. Integrating structured AI education, training program, and ethical guideline is essential for preparing students for an AI-enhanced healthcare landscape.

Indexed as

AI literacyeducational barriersmedical educationstudent attitudestechnology in healthcare

Identifiers

PMID40917814
PMCPMC12412764

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.