Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42065502›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026

The Influencing Factors of Medical Postgraduates' Usage Intention Toward Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content Tools in Academic Research: Qualitative Analysis.

Chen Wang, Liu Wang, Xuejiao Zhang, Huiying Qi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet 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

4 authors.

Chen WangDepartment of Health Informatics and Management, School of Health Humanities, Peking University, 38 Xueyuan Rd, Haidian District, Beijing, China, 86 13611019865.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0396-1531
Liu WangDepartment of Language and Culture in Medicine, School of Health Humanities, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-6151-1537
Xuejiao ZhangSchool of Nursing, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-3600-8725
Huiying QiDepartment of Health Informatics and Management, School of Health Humanities, Peking University, 38 Xueyuan Rd, Haidian District, Beijing, China, 86 13611019865.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4075-3720

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence-generated content (AIGC) tools into academic research offers transformative potential for enhancing productivity and innovation. However, within the highly regulated and ethically sensitive medical context, the use of AIGC is accompanied by significant challenges. Medical postgraduates, as the future vanguard of medical science, play a crucial role in the advancement of digital health, and their intention to use AIGC tools will significantly influence the use of these emerging technologies in medical research. Despite the growing popularity of AIGC tools, there remains a paucity of in-depth understanding of the factors driving or hindering medical postgraduates' intention to use these tools in academic research. A clear comprehension of these influencing factors is essential to foster the responsible, effective, and sustainable integration of AIGC into medical research. Objective: This study aimed to systematically explore the key factors influencing medical postgraduates' intention to use AIGC tools in academic research, with the goal of informing strategies to promote their ethical use and enhance scholarly research capabilities. Methods: We used a qualitative research design based on grounded theory. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 30 medical postgraduates across diverse specialties, all of whom had prior research experience and familiarity with AIGC tools. Participants were recruited purposively to ensure diverse perspectives. Data analysis followed a systematic coding process to inductively develop a conceptual model, which was further structured and interpreted through the theoretical lens of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology. Results: Our analysis identified 7 core factors directly shaping usage intention: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, individual characteristics, task characteristics, and technology characteristics. Further analysis revealed that performance expectancy acted as a mediating variable in the relationships between both task characteristics and technology characteristics and usage intention. Additionally, social influence moderated the relationship between task characteristics and performance expectancy. The research findings underscore that, while AIGC tools are valued for assisting daily research tasks, medical postgraduates' intention to use them in academic research is influenced by technical deficiencies, high cognitive load, and the strict ethical risks and data governance requirements in the medical field. Conclusions: This study constructs a conceptual model aimed at elucidating the influencing factors of medical graduate students' intention to use AIGC in academic research. Recommendations derived from the findings include (1) fostering artificial intelligence literacy and critical competency among medical postgraduates; (2) optimizing AIGC tools to better address domain-specific needs, accuracy, and security concerns prevalent in health research; and (3) establishing clear academic supervision and ethical governance mechanisms to ensure responsible use. These measures are essential to harness the potential of AIGC while safeguarding the rigor and integrity of medical academic research.

Indexed as

AcademiaArtificial IntelligenceBiomedical ResearchResearch PersonnelAdultEthics, ResearchFemaleHumansIntentionInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative Researchartificial intelligence toolsgrounded theoryinfluencing factorsmedical studentsscientific research

Identifiers

PMID42065502
PMCPMC13133984

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.