ArticleScientific reports2025
Pharm D student's Knowledge, perception, and practice of CHAT-GPT in clinical training: a web-based cross-sectional survey in India.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Evaluating community pharmacists' practices in managing insomnia in Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study using simulated patient visits.Frontiers in 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT captured significant attention in healthcare and pharmacy education, yet their real applicability and validity require extensive investigation in practice. Our study aimed to assess Pharm-D students’ knowledge, perceptions, and practices (KPP) toward ChatGPT in clinical pharmacy practice training in India. A nationwide, web-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted between June and September 2025 to assess KPP towards ChatGPT use among PharmD students. A self-administered, pre-designed, and validated questionnaire was utilized to collect demographics, educational profiles, and KPP toward ChatGPT use in clinical training. We used social media platforms and Messenger applications and approached professional groups to recruit the study participants by using the snowball sampling technique. A chi-square test was applied to elucidate factors associated with KPP of ChatGPT use in the clinical training. The two-tailed P-value less than 0.05 was considered as a statistically significant value. In our study, the majority (> 90%) of the PharmD students answered all basic knowledge questions about ChatGPT, except the source of ChatGPT’s knowledge. The majority (85.8%) perceived that they indeed benefited from the use of ChatGPT in their training; the agreement levels for benefits varies across different activities. Regarding concerns, ChatGPT use can reduce the interaction with mentors (74.4%), increase the similarity index/AI detection score (64.1%), and increase the risk of inaccurate or misleading information (66.1%), ethical issues (63.3%), and limited applicability (61.0%). The use of ChatGPT in the selection of medicine and calculation of dose was low compared with other clinical pharmacy activities. Variables such as previous experience using AI tools and prior training on AI tool use were significantly associated with greater practice of ChatGPT. Conversely, the perceived benefits of ChatGPT were significantly positively associated with students who had completed internships (P = 0.019) and had received prior training (P = 0.022) on AI tools. There was a significant positive weak correlation between knowledge and perceived concerns (r = 0.177; P < 0.001), and moderate positive correlation between perceived benefits and practices of the participants (r = 0.377; P < 0.001) towards ChatGPT use. Perceived concerns (r = -0.126; P < 0.012) were significantly negatively weakly correlated with ChatGPT use practices in clinical training. Majority of the PharmD students have good knowledge about ChatGPT, and positive perception towards ChatGPT benefits in clinical training. However, the practice was limited to certain activities due to concerns about accuracy, ethics, and reduced mentor interaction upon use of ChatGPT. Prior experience and training were significantly associated with high practice and positive attitudes. The study recommends to integrate AI tool use and application in pharmacy curriculum and train the faculty to promote competent and responsible use of ChatGPT in clinical pharmacy practice. Students must validate the information from the standard resources or interacting with mentors to deal with misleading information generated by AI tools.
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.