ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Implementation, Acceptability, and Actions After Using an AI Workplace Health Kiosk in a Low-Resource Public School Workplace Setting: Cross-Sectional Pilot Study.
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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled digital health kiosks are increasingly used in workplaces and communities to promote health awareness, especially in low- and middle-income countries. However, evidence on their real-world use, user acceptability, and immediate behavioral responses remains limited, especially outside formal clinical care. Objective: This study evaluated the implementation experience, user acceptability, and immediate self-reported actions associated with the use of an AI-enabled workplace health kiosk among public school teachers in an urban, low-resource setting in the Philippines. Methods: We conducted a study involving 384 teachers who used an AI health kiosk during wellness activities. The kiosk provided informational health indicators. Postuse surveys assessed usability; trust; privacy concerns; and self-reported actions, such as health consultations and sharing results. Analyses were descriptive and exploratory. The study did not evaluate diagnostic accuracy, clinical validity, disease prevalence, or health outcomes. Results: Most participants (162/189, 85.7%) rated the kiosk experience as good or excellent, and 93.1% (176/189) found it easy to use. Overall, trust in kiosk results was high, although 31.7% (60/189) of the participants expressed privacy concerns. After using the kiosk, 70.9% (134/189) of the participants consulted a health care professional, and 66.7% (126/189) made lifestyle changes. A small percentage (32/189, 16.9%) reported no follow-up actions, mainly due to uncertainty about the next steps. User feedback highlighted convenience and accessibility but also noted operational issues such as queuing and connectivity problems. Conclusions: In this workplace setting, an AI health kiosk was feasible, acceptable, and linked to immediate self-reported health actions. Findings are preliminary and context specific. Formal validation, follow-up studies, and further evaluation are needed before use in diagnostic, population health, or policy contexts.
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.