ArticleScientific reports2025
Decoding trust in large language models for healthcare in Saudi Arabia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Predictors of Trust and Engagement in Personalized Healthcare: A Study of AI-Driven Diagnosis and Treatment in Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Public awareness, trust, perceived usefulness, and willingness to use ChatGPT for healthcare communication among adults in the Asir Region, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A validated framework for responsible AI in healthcare autonomous systems.Scientific reports · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the factors influencing user trust and decision-making when using Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, specifically focusing on ChatGPT in the healthcare domain within the Saudi context. As AI-powered conversational agents are increasingly utilized for medical advice, symptom assessment, and healthcare decision support, understanding user trust and adoption behavior is critical. Leveraging constructs from trust in technology, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Health Belief Model (HBM), and usability frameworks, the study utilizes Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze relationships among competence, reliability, transparency, security, trustworthiness, persuasiveness, and user satisfaction. The findings highlight the significant role of reliability, security, and transparency in building trust and supporting decision-making with ChatGPT in healthcare applications. Notably, out of the 15 tested hypotheses, 10 were supported, reinforcing the critical importance of trust and satisfaction in AI adoption for health-related interactions. The research contributes to understanding cultural influences on AI adoption in Saudi Arabia's healthcare sector and offers practical recommendations for enhancing the trustworthiness and effectiveness of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT in medical consultations. These insights are vital for developing responsible AI practices and ensuring ethical deployment of AI-powered tools in healthcare settings, ultimately fostering user confidence in AI-assisted medical decision-making.
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.