ArticleJMIR medical education2025
Assessing Pharmacists' Use and Perception of AI Chatbots in Pharmacy Practice: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 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.
- Artificial intelligence tool utilization in deprescribing practices among community pharmacists in Jordan: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Identifying Measurement Dimensions of Users' Benefit-Risk Perceptions of AI in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
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
backgroundThe use of artificial intelligence (AI)-based large language model chatbots such as ChatGPT has become increasingly popular in many disciplines. However, concerns exist regarding ethics, legal considerations, accuracy, and reproducibility with its use in health care practice, education, and research.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess current perceptions and use of AI chatbots in pharmacy practice from the perspective of pharmacist preceptors and determine factors that may influence the use of AI chatbots in practice.
methodsA cross-sectional survey of pharmacy practice preceptors from Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan was conducted using the validated Technology Acceptance Model Edited to Assess ChatGPT Adoption (TAME-ChatGPT) survey tool to collect information regarding current use of AI chatbots and factors associated with use, including ease of use, perceived risk, technology or social influences, anxiety, and perceived usefulness.
resultsA total of 194 responses (194/1877, 10.34% response rate) were received. Approximately one-third (n=59, 30.4%) of respondents reported having used an AI chatbot, with 51.5% (n=100) indicating that they planned to start or would continue using chatbots in the future. In practice, common uses for AI chatbots included summarizing information (n=90, 46.4%), letter of recommendation writing (n=64, 32.9%), and obtaining disease state information (n=63, 32.5%). The 2 main constructs associated with the use of chatbots identified from the TAME-ChatGPT tool included perceived risk of using AI and attitude toward AI. Factors that predicted pharmacists' current use of AI chatbots included positive attitude toward technology (odds ratio [OR] 3.64, 95% CI 2.08-6.36), coworker use of AI (OR 7.41, 95% CI 2.64-20.8), and working in academia (OR 5.62, 95% CI 1.30-24.23).
conclusionsMost pharmacist respondents had not used an AI chatbot and were unlikely to make patient care decisions based on information from a chatbot. The TAME-ChatGPT survey is validated for assessing chatbot use and attitudes among pharmacists, and future studies using this survey tool can guide the implementation of chatbots into pharmacy 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.