ArticleBMC medical education2026
Familiarity, attitude and practice of postgraduate health science students of Pakistan regarding the implication of artificial intelligence in research: an analytical survey.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is one of the areas of healthcare research that is now growing at the fastest rate in the healthcare sector. This is momentous to know about Pakistani postgraduate health science (PGHS) students’ familiarity, attitudes, and practice regarding the implication of AI in research. Therefore, the current study was designed and conducted to explore PGHS students’ opinions.
methodA cross-sectional, analytical survey was used. A questionnaire was adopted and validated to seek the opinion of PGHS students. The test-retest method was used to measure reliability. Exploratory factor analysis was used to assess the construct validity of the attitude and practice scales in the questionnaire. Moreover, confirmatory factor analysis was also performed. Non-parametric Fisher Exact test was used to find any significant associations between the items and students’ characteristics.
resultsA pre-test (n = 20 students) was conducted to assess the questionnaire’s suitability and readability, and no feedback indicated a need for modifications. The test-retest method was employed, and the total scores were then correlated, yielding an intraclass correlation value of 0.924. Factor analysis of the scale revealed a single common factor with all loadings exceeding 0.40. Cronbach’s alpha was found in the range of 0.811–0.866. A total of 257 PGHS students responded to the questionnaire. A significant majority (64%) reported no formal training in AI. The majority of students (76%) planned to integrate AI in the future. Most students agreed or strongly agreed on the usefulness of AI in academic research (93%). Almost 60% of students strongly agreed or agreed that AI will transform health care and clinical research. Half of them believed that AI tools would not replace researchers.
conclusionPGHS students have a positive opinion regarding AI and acknowledge its potential to improve problem-solving and research. However, there are serious worries about the ethical ramifications of AI, accuracy, and employment displacement. The majority of students supported the introduction of AI training, which seems to be a current deficiency in the health science curriculum in Pakistan. To promote the broader use of AI-enabled healthcare research, a multifaceted strategy that addresses specific issues, provides customized training, and includes education is required.
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.