ArticleBMC medical education2026
AI knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and willingness to use AI among oncologists in China: a nationwide cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC medical education, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into healthcare, particularly in oncology, has attracted considerable attention in China. Understanding oncologists' views on AI is essential for developing effective integration strategies in oncology settings. This study aimed to evaluate AI knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and willingness among nationwide oncologists in China. Additionally, we identified factors influencing oncologists' willingness to use AI.
methodsA nationwide cross-sectional survey of 1,538 oncologists from 31 regions in China was conducted between August and November 2023 using a 22-item online questionnaire, launched on the Wenjuan online platform and shared by members of Chinese Anti-Cancer Association via WeChat.
resultsThe survey achieved an 87.78% completion rate (1,350/1,538). Among the respondents, 90% had used medical AI products, and 14.59% had used ChatGPT. Respondents demonstrated different levels of understanding of AI terms (mean = 3.524), limitations (mean = 3.256), trust (mean = 3.759), and acceptance (mean = 4.022), with scores ranging from 1 (low) to 5 (high) on 5-point Likert items. Perceptions of AI surpassing doctors' diagnostic abilities had a mean score of 3.255, whereas perceptions of AI replacing doctors had a mean score of 2.829. Both perceptions, along with willingness to use AI (mean = 4.162) and support for its widespread use (mean = 4.061), were also measured on 5-point Likert scale. Factors associated with high willingness to use AI included senior clinical titles (OR 1.41 [95% CI: 1.05-1.90]), working in the radiation oncology department (OR 1.9 [95% CI: 1.29-2.81]), high understanding AI terms (OR 4.66 [95% CI: 3.46-6.34]), prior experience with ChatGPT (OR 2.28 [95% CI: 1.32-4.07]), and high scores on items such as "AI had already surpassed doctors' diagnostic abilities" (OR 8.82 [95% CI: 1.82-2.56]) or "AI will replace doctors" (OR 13.32 [95% CI: 2.11-3.13]).
conclusionsThis study unveils a good understanding and positive attitudes toward AI, coupled with a strong willingness to use AI products among nationwide oncologists across China, despite ongoing controversy over whether AI will replace doctors. Those with senior titles or greater AI knowledge and experience show a high willingness to use AI. Considering the findings, targeted AI education and increased exposure are crucial for the successful integration of AI into oncology settings in China.
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.