ArticleCureus2025
Bridging the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Gap: A Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) Study to Advance Medical Education in Rural Andhra Pradesh.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundartificial intelligence (AI) refers to the use of computers and technology to simulate intelligent behavior and critical thinking comparable to humans. During the course of medicine, AI aids medical students in various tasks like studying theory, practical applications, seminar presentations, proposal creation, etc. Understanding and adapting to these advancements is crucial for medical students to enhance their medical knowledge and also to enhance time efficiency.
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) regarding AI tools among medical students in rural Andhra Pradesh. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted over two months (June and July 2024) at a rural medical college in Southern Andhra Pradesh. Using systematic random sampling, 210 medical students were selected as participants. After obtaining informed consent, data were collected through an online survey and analyzed using IBM Corp. Released 2014. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
resultsThe study revealed that 84.5% (169/210) of study subjects were using at least one AI tool in medical studies. About 61.4% of study subjects had good knowledge about AI tools being used for studying medicine. It was found that 93.8% of the study subjects had a positive attitude towards the use of AI tools during the course of medicine. It was noted that 89.5% of them were using only four AI tools for medical studies, with the most common being used for the preparation of PowerPoint presentations (34%). The most commonly used AI tools were ChatGPT (OpenAI, California, USA), Meta AI (California, USA), Snap AI (California, USA), and Google Gemini (California, USA), in descending order.
conclusionThe students have good knowledge and favorable attitudes towards AI tools, but their practical application was narrow in scope, with most students using only a limited set of tools for specific academic purposes. Improving knowledge may enhance practical use among them. A module on the use of AI in medical studies should be integrated into the medical curriculum.
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.