ArticleScientific reports2026
Expectations and concerns of primary healthcare patients in rural areas and small towns in Poland regarding artificial intelligence.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From Assistance to Autonomy: Acceptability of Progressive Artificial Intelligence Integration in Facial Reconstructive Surgery-Protocol for Within-Subjects Vignette Experiment Among Romanian Adults.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The anatomy of AI implementation skepticism in Polish healthcare: an explanatory mixed-methods analysis of psychographic barriers among healthcare professionals.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare presents transformative opportunities, but patient perspectives, particularly from digitally excluded populations, remain underexplored. This study aimed to analyze the awareness, acceptance and concerns regarding the use of AI in healthcare among primary care patients in rural and small-town regions of Poland. This is characteristic of the country, as over 60% of its population lives in such regions. It also sought to identify the demographic and psychosocial determinants of trust in AI. A cross-sectional survey was conducted using a paper questionnaire distributed to 545 adult patients in three primary care facilities in towns with populations below 20,000. Demographics, digital literacy, and attitudes towards AI were assessed. Statistical analyses included non-parametric tests and ordinal logistic regression. Most of the respondents expressed neutrality (43%) or a negative (31%) attitudes toward AI. Only 12.7% had direct experience with AI, and full trust in AI-assisted diagnoses was low (5.9%). Education was the strongest predictor of a positive AI attitude (P < 0.001); age was also significant (P = 0.04), while gender and place of residence were not. Most patients (86%) emphasized the importance of medical staff support.Patients in areas of low digital literacy approach AI with cautious optimism, valuing its potential but requiring human oversight. To foster an equitable adoption of AI, communication and education efforts must address patient concerns and expectations.
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.