ArticleBMC pediatrics2026
Assessing pediatricians' readiness for artificial intelligence: a cross-sectional study in Istanbul, Türki̇ye.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 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
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into healthcare, including pediatrics, offering new opportunities for diagnosis, management, and decision support. However, the effective implementation of AI depends largely on healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and readiness to adopt these technologies. This study aimed to evaluate pediatricians' general attitudes toward artificial intelligence and their level of readiness for medical AI in Istanbul, Türkiye at tertiary hospital. Distinct from previous research focusing primarily on medical students, this study investigates the AI readiness of practicing pediatricians within a major tertiary hospital in Istanbul, addressing a critical gap in professional clinical workforce assessment.
methodsThis descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted between August 1 and November 1, 2025, at Prof. Dr. Cemil Taşcıoğlu City Hospital. A total of 130 pediatricians participated. Data were collected using a sociodemographic questionnaire, the GAAIS (General Attitudes toward Artificial Intelligence Scale), and the MAIRS-MS (Medical Artificial Intelligence Readiness Scale for Medical Students). The validity and reliability of scales in Turkish have been previously investigated in various studies. The internal consistency of the scales was excellent, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.972 in our study. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 27. Correlation, t-test, ANOVA, and non-parametric tests were applied where appropriate.
resultsThe mean age of participants was 37.47 ± 9.31 years, and 58.5% were female. The mean AI positive attitude score was 3.81 ± 0.74, and the negative attitude score was 2.83 ± 0.81. The total MAIRS-MS score was 74.97 ± 13.01, indicating a moderate-to-high level of AI readiness. Age was negatively correlated with AI positive attitude and total MAIRS score (p < 0.05). Participants with ≥ 21 years of professional experience had significantly lower AI readiness and positive attitude scores than younger participants (p < 0.05). A strong positive correlation was found between AI positive attitude and total MAIRS-MS score (r = 0.764, p < 0.01). Multiple regression analysis revealed that "Ability" (β = 0.516, p < 0.001) and "Cognition" (β = 0.323, p < 0.001) factors were the strongest predictors of a positive attitude toward AI (R
conclusionPediatricians generally demonstrated positive attitudes and moderate-to-high readiness for artificial intelligence in our study. However, advanced age and longer professional experience were associated with lower readiness levels. These findings highlight the need for a structured AI education and training program, especially targeting senior physicians, to ensure effective and ethical integration of AI into pediatric 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.