ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
How public discourse on medical AI shapes governance expectations: a Weibo-based mixed-methods study from China.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Global English-language-dominated discourse on artificial intelligence in healthcare: a three-year longitudinal analysis of the #AIinHealthcare movement on X.Frontiers in digital 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Public perceptions of medical artificial intelligence (AI) directly influence its implementation and governance. While most existing research focuses on Western contexts, there is limited exploration of public responses in collectivist cultures and state-driven healthcare systems like China, particularly regarding the dynamic interplay of cognition, affect, and behavior. This study aims to fill this gap by examining public discourse on medical AI in China, with a specific focus on topic landscape, sentiment distribution, and the Cognition-Affect-Behavior (CAB) mechanisms driving governance. Methods: We collected 12,356 valid Weibo posts on medical AI from January 2022 to December 2024. The Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modeling identified key topics, sentiment analysis assessed emotional tendencies, and grounded theory analysis was applied to 1,000 posts using open, axial, and selective coding to construct a theoretical model. Results: The findings revealed that public discussions covered eight key topics, categorized into three dimensions: foundational drivers of medical AI development, application domains of medical AI, and societal benefits and risks challenges. All topics exhibited a coexistence of positive and negative emotions. The CAB model showed that, cognitively, the public emphasized the human core of healthcare, while acknowledging AI's efficacy, leading to a collaborative augmentation model for the physician-AI integration, where decision-making is physician-led, and AI serves as a supportive tool. Emotionally, the public expressed both amazement at AI's capabilities and expectations for physician-AI integration, alongside resistance to AI and anxiety about the physician-AI integration. Behaviorally, three proactive agency governance strategies were observed, which either reinforced or recalibrated existing cognitive frameworks. Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the public's cognitive and emotional responses, as well as proactive behaviors toward medical AI in China. It also highlights the emergence of bottom-up accountability mechanisms, where civic engagement shapes the development of AI governance frameworks in healthcare.
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.