Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41894543›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Training Needs for AI in Primary Care: National Survey Study of Clinicians in the Veterans Health Administration.

Varsha G Vimalananda, Ben Kragen, Alison J Leibowitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Varsha G VimalanandaCenter for Health Optimization and Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0738-672X
Ben KragenCenter for Health Optimization and Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2553-9489
Alison J LeibowitzCenter for Health Optimization and Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, MA, United States.ORCID 0009-0008-8842-2764

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinicians are the interface between artificial intelligence (AI) applications and patient care. To maximize benefits and minimize risks of AI, clinicians must be "AI-ready"-that is, willing and able to understand, evaluate, and appropriately use AI tools in practice. Prior literature suggests that clinicians lack fundamental competencies in the use of AI. These gaps could be especially problematic in primary care, given its broad reach into patient care. We surveyed primary care providers (PCPs) in the United States' largest integrated health care system, relatively early in its widespread implementation of clinical AI for frontline use, in order to identify readiness gaps that may warrant particular attention as part of a comprehensive AI implementation strategy.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to characterize PCPs' use, knowledge, attitudes, and training priorities related to AI in order to inform health system AI implementation efforts.

methodsWe conducted a national cross-sectional survey of United States Veterans Health Administration (VA) PCPs in October 2025, assessing AI use, self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and training experience. Descriptive analyses summarized responses with exploratory bivariate comparisons across clinician subgroups. Conventional content analysis with inductive coding was used to characterize open-ended responses providing a definition of AI.

resultsAmong 170 respondents (170/989, 17.2% response rate), 66.5% (113/170) reported current AI use, most commonly generative AI and decision support tools. Overall attitudes toward AI were positive, with 70.6% (120/170) mostly enthusiastic or more enthusiastic than apprehensive. Confidence in understanding sources of AI bias (62/170, 36.5%) and ethical issues (81/170, 47.6%) was limited. When asked to define AI, very few respondents provided an accurate technical definition. Key concerns about use of AI included accountability, accuracy, and transparency. Though 88.2% (150/170) identified AI training as a priority, only 26.5% (45/170) had any training. Training experiences ranged widely in source, focus, and structure.

conclusionsPCPs are eager to harness AI's practical advantages but lack foundational competencies to do so in ways that maximize benefit and minimize risk. Our findings highlight a need for targeted education that prioritizes critical appraisal, workflow integration, and risk mitigation, supported by governance that addresses clinicians' concerns and validated measures to evaluate progress toward an AI-ready workforce. These steps can empower PCPs to leverage AI safely and effectively and strengthen the quality and safety of primary care delivery at scale.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePrimary Health CareAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesUnited States Department of Veterans Affairsartificial intelligenceeducationhealth personnelprimary health careprofessionalsurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41894543
PMCPMC13150424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.