ArticlePeerJ2026
Navigating the future-community pharmacists' attitudes towards AI integration in pharmacy services: a cross-sectional study in Aseer, Saudi Arabia.
Article in PeerJ, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There have been advances in healthcare technologies in general and in the pharmacy field in particular. Among the most promising is Artificial Intelligence (AI), which has the potential to advance pharmacy practice. The current study was conducted to assess community pharmacists' attitudes and preferences regarding AI-enabled tools in their day-to-day practice and factors affecting them. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional self-administered questionnaire. It was conducted in community pharmacies across the Aseer region. A total of 117 community pharmacists were recruited using a non-probability convenience sampling method. The data collection tool was adapted from a previous study. It collected data related to participants' demographics and their attitudes towards AI-enabled tools in their practice. Results: A total of 85.5% of the participants had internet access, and 83.8% of them had access to scientific drug information resources. In addition, 81.2% of the participants reported prior awareness of AI. Among those, about half of the participants reported sufficient knowledge of AI (51.6%). A total of 58.9% of them did not think that AI would replace pharmacists in the health care system. However, 71.6% of the pharmacists thought that AI would reduce errors in medical practice. Pharmacists showed preference for using AI in medical data collection, identifying drug-related problems, and medication dispensing. Discussion and conclusion: Community pharmacists in the Aseer region showed moderate awareness, cautious attitudes, and selective preferences toward AI implementation in pharmacy practice. While pharmacists recognized the potential benefits of AI, limited knowledge and varying levels of digital infrastructure may influence its adoption. These findings highlight the importance of integrating AI education into pharmacy training programs, providing continuing professional development opportunities, and improving digital infrastructure to facilitate the effective implementation of AI technologies in community pharmacy practice.
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.