ArticleScientific reports2026
Dual dimensions of artificial intelligence use among medical academia: related knowledge, attitudes and ethical concerns, a national survey, 2025.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AI integration into medical education and practice has its benefits and risks. This national web-based cross-sectional survey on Egyptian medical staff and students aimed to assess knowledge, attitudes, and concerns regarding the use of AI. This study comprised 2765 medical students and 500 medical staff, with a mean age of 20.8 and 29.9 years, respectively, and higher percentages of females among both groups. Medical students demonstrated satisfactory knowledge of AI compared to medical staff (p < 0.001). Unfortunately, the majority of both groups (80.4% of staff and 81.6% of students) expressed negative attitudes toward AI use. Male participants had significantly higher attitude scores than females in both groups. Knowledge score and gender were significant predictors of attitude towards AI among medical staff (p<0.005), while gender was a significant predictor of attitude scores among medical students (p < 0.001). The total AI usage score in this study was higher among students than staff, particularly for idea generation. Medical staff demonstrated a slightly higher total concern score regarding the use of AI in medical education and practice compared with students. The results emphasize the necessity of engagement, focused education and training, compatible solutions, uniform standards, guidelines, and the smooth incorporation of AI into medical education and clinical 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.