ArticleBMC medical education2026
Future pharmacists in the age of Artificial Intelligence: a mixed-methods study of first-year students in Vietnam.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess AI readiness, perceptions, and usage patterns among first-year pharmacy students, and to identify factors associated with AI engagement.
methodsA mixed-methods study was conducted among 220 first-year pharmacy students. Quantitative data were collected using a structured questionnaire assessing AI readiness (cognition, ability, vision, ethics), perceptions, and usage, followed by multivariable regression analyses. Qualitative insights were obtained through semi-structured interviews with a purposive subsample and analyzed thematically.
resultsStudents showed moderate overall AI readiness, with higher cognition and ability than vision and ethics. AI use was common, primarily for academic tasks, with ChatGPT as the most frequently used tool. Positive perceptions of AI in education predominated, alongside concerns about academic integrity and over-reliance. Higher digital literacy and urban residence were associated with greater AI readiness and more favorable perceptions. Qualitative findings revealed strong interest in structured, pharmacy-specific AI education emphasizing practical application and ethical guidance.
conclusionsFirst-year pharmacy students demonstrate positive attitudes but uneven preparedness for AI. Early, structured integration of AI training that combines technical foundations with ethical and future-oriented perspectives is needed to support responsible AI adoption in pharmacy education.
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.