ArticleScientific reports2026
Artificial intelligence predicts healthcare workers' antibiotic use intentions from psychological and behavioral measures across multiple theories.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) remains a global health priority, partly driven by non-guideline-concordant antibiotic prescribing among healthcare workers. Existing interventions often overlook the psychological and contextual factors that shape prescribing behaviour. This study integrated behavioural theory with explainable machine learning to identify psychological predictors of intention to use antimicrobials appropriately among clinicians. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 1135 healthcare workers from four public hospitals in China. Participants completed questionnaires based on constructs from the Theory of Planned Behavior, the Health Belief Model, the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), Self-Efficacy Theory, Social Support Theory, and cognitive processing frameworks. LASSO regression and SHAP analysis were applied alongside machine-learning classifiers (e.g., XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost) to identify key predictors and interactions influencing intention to use antimicrobials appropriately. Social support, cognitive processing, knowledge and skills, and health beliefs were the most important predictors. SHAP analysis revealed nonlinear interactions, particularly between social support and cognitive processing. Ensemble models achieved high predictive accuracy (F1-scores > 0.94) for high and medium intention to use antimicrobials appropriately, whereas classifying low-intention respondents remained more challenging. Combining behavioural theory with explainable AI offers a scalable approach to identifying clinicians at risk of non-guideline-concordant prescribing. These findings support the development of psychologically tailored, real-time interventions to strengthen antibiotic stewardship and address AMR across diverse health-system settings.
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.