SynthesisBMC medical education2025
Medical undergraduate students' readiness and anxiety toward artificial intelligence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical education, 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.
- Performance and Hallucination Analysis of Large Language Models on European Anesthesiology Examinations: Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice, Educational Transformation, and Ethical Governance.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Development and validation of the student readiness and anxiety scale for AI-assisted biology teaching (SRAS-AIBT).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- AI competency misalignment in preventive medicine: a multi-stakeholder survey with latent profile analysis in Sichuan and Chongqing.International journal of public health · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is transforming healthcare, yet medical undergraduates often lack adequate AI training. This study systematically evaluated their readiness and anxiety toward AI.
methodsWe searched seven databases from the creation date of databases to July 2025. Studies using validated scales (MAIRS-MS or AIAS) to assess medical undergraduates' AI readiness or anxiety were included. Subgroup analysis comparing AI readiness between clinical and dental students and nursing students (including midwifery) was performed.
resultsA total of 25 studies were included, of which 2 studies reported both MAIRS-MS scores and AIAS scores, and 1 study reported only MAIRS-MS and AIAS total scores without subdimension scores. The AI readiness analysis indicated a high level in the Ethics subdimension, but only moderate levels in the total score as well as the Cognition, Ability, and Vision subdimensions. For AI Anxiety, the Learning subdimension scored low, whereas the overall score and the Job replacement, Sociotechnical blindness, and AI configuration subdimensions scored moderate. Subgroup analysis showed that nursing students' overall MAIRS-MS scores, as well as their scores in the Ability (p < 0.001), Vision (p = 0.0486), and Ethics (p = 0.0134) subdimensions, were significantly higher than those of clinical and dental students. However, due to only 1 study investigating AI anxiety in clinical and dental students, subgroup comparisons for AIAS scores were not performed.
conclusionsMedical undergraduates exhibit moderate AI readiness and anxiety overall, with nursing students showing significantly higher readiness than clinical and dental students.
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.