ArticleMediterranean journal of rheumatology2025
Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Artificial Intelligence (AI) among Rheumatology Professionals: An Online Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Mediterranean journal of rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceptions, knowledge and adoption of artificial intelligence in rheumatology: results from a British Society for Rheumatology survey.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of large language model-based AI platforms for radiographic assessment in rheumatoid arthritis.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- Teaching evidence-based principles in Rheumatology.Rheumatology international · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Rheumatology: Quo Vadis?Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI), as a significant technological advancement, aims to simulate and automate human intelligence. Aim/Objective: To assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of artificial intelligence among rheumatology professionals in India. Methods: We invited rheumatology professionals to complete an online survey from June to September 2024. Online surveys were circulated in social media and emails. A descriptive analysis was conducted to compare whether survey responses varied between respondents who received training in AI earlier, consultants, and residents in rheumatology. Result: The survey included 173 participants, mostly from private hospitals. The response rate was 11.53%. While awareness of AI was high (98.3%), only 54.3% understood specific terminology such as machine learning. Although 81.5% believed AI could enhance patient care, only 33.5% regularly used AI tools in clinical practice. A substantial knowledge gap exists, and there is a need for formal training sessions in Artificial Intelligence among rheumatology professionals. The main obstacles to applying AI were patient data security concerns (64.2%), potential ethical and human implications of using AI in medicine (25.4%), and insufficient training (3.5%). Half feared losing their expertise, and AI had a difficult learning curve. Conclusion: The results indicate a substantial knowledge gap and the need for formal training sessions in Artificial Intelligence among rheumatology professionals.
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.