ArticleBMC medical education2026
Attitudes toward artificial intelligence tools in university students: associations with body appreciation and e-healthy diet literacy - implications for digital health education.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis cross-sectional study aimed to determine attitudes toward the use of artificial intelligence tools, body appreciation, and e-healthy diet literacy (e-HDL) levels among university students, and to analytically evaluate the relationships among these variables.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted among 440 undergraduate university students aged 18-30 years enrolled at Gaziantep University. Data were collected with web-based questionnaire that included a Descriptive Information Form, the Artificial Intelligence Attitude Scale-Short Form (AIAS-4), the Body Appreciation Scale (BAS), and the e-HDL Scale.
resultsThe mean AIAS-4, BAS, and e-HDL total scores were 5.47 ± 2.62, 38.91 ± 9.00, and 37.89 ± 7.04, respectively. AIAS-4 scores were positively correlated with both BAS and e-HDL total scores. Male students had significantly higher AIAS-4 scores than female students, whereas female students had significantly higher BAS scores. Male students had significantly higher AIAS-4 scores than female students, whereas female students had significantly higher BAS scores; no significant sex difference was observed in e-HDL total scores. AIAS-4 and BAS scores differed significantly across BMI categories, while e-HDL total scores did not. In multiple linear regression analysis, higher BAS scores (β = 0.325, p < 0.001), higher e-HDL total scores (β = 0.247, p < 0.001), and higher BMI (β = 0.107, p = 0.021) were independently associated with higher AIAS-4 scores, whereas female sex was independently associated with lower AIAS-4 scores (β = -0.138, p = 0.003). Notably, BMI was not significantly correlated with AIAS-4 scores in the bivariate analysis (r = 0.083, p > 0.05), yet emerged as a significant independent predictor in the multivariable model (β = 0.107, p = 0.021). This discrepancy is consistent with a suppression effect, whereby sex - which is associated with both BMI and AI attitudes - masks the independent contribution of BMI in unadjusted analyses. After adjustment for sex and other covariates in the multivariable model, the association between BMI and AI attitudes became statistically detectable. This finding underscores the importance of multivariable adjustment when examining predictors that are inter-correlated. Age was not significantly associated with AIAS-4 scores. The regression model explained 22.0% of the variance in AIAS-4 scores.
conclusionAmong university students, more positive attitudes toward artificial intelligence tools were associated with higher body appreciation and e-HDL. In addition, sex and BMI were independently related to AI attitudes, whereas age and year of study were not. Although nearly all participants reported using AI, the regression model explained 22% of the variance in AI attitudes, indicating that the drivers of more positive attitudes remain multifaceted and warrant further investigation.
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.