ArticleCureus2026
Perceptions, Utilization, and Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Medical Science Liaisons: A Global Cross-Sectional Survey of Medical Affairs Professionals.
Article in Cureus, 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
Introduction Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being adopted in Medical Affairs and has the potential to transform the role of medical science liaisons (MSLs). This study was designed to assess the current state of AI adoption, perceptions, organizational readiness, and potential impact among MSLs through a global survey. Methods A global, cross-sectional survey was conducted, including 367 participants from 48 countries representing diverse roles in Medical Affairs, including medical science liaisons (MSLs), MSL leadership, and executive Medical Affairs leadership, across pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical device, diagnostic, and other healthcare organizations. The survey was distributed through professional networks, including LinkedIn, Medical Science Liaison Society newsletter subscribers, pharmaceutical industry conferences, and online platforms dedicated to Medical Affairs professionals, using a non-probability convenience sampling approach. Results Overall, 27% of the respondents currently utilize AI tools for key opinion leader (KOL) engagements. The primary applications included literature review (22%), data analysis (20%), and presentation preparation (16%). The most commonly reported benefits were improved efficiency (42%) and better preparation for KOL engagements (18%). However, only one-third of organizations had established policies governing AI use by MSLs, indicating a gap in governance and organizational readiness. Knowledge of AI varied: 41% of the respondents reported being somewhat knowledgeable, and 30% reported not being very knowledgeable. Despite this, 74% of the respondents believed that AI would be impactful or highly impactful in Medical Affairs and the MSL function, and 87% considered it important or very important to learn about AI technology to remain competitive. Conclusion AI adoption among MSLs remains limited, but there is a clear and growing recognition of its potential impact. These findings highlight both the opportunity and the need for improved governance, education, and strategic implementation as AI continues to shape the evolving role of MSLs within Medical Affairs.
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.