ArticleEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2026
Artificial intelligence (AI) in action: a cross-continental survey of AI adoption among field epidemiology fellows in Canada, the United States, and Europe, 2024.
Article in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUNDTechnologies available for applied public health practice are rapidly evolving. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools have become more accessible, however, their utilisation by field epidemiologists has not been described.AIMWe explored AI use among Canadian, European, and United States (US) Field Epidemiology Training Program (FETP) fellows.METHODSFellows in the three programmes (n = 220) were invited to an online survey available from 25 November 2024 to 5 December 2024. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected concerning the AI platforms fellows used, AI applications, comfort level when applying AI, use frequency, impact on work, barriers, ethical concerns, AI policy/guideline availability, and AI training.RESULTSThere were 105 (48%) survey respondents: 13, 56 and 36 in the Canadian, US and European FETPs respectively. The proportion of respondents who reported applying AI for work was 66% (69/105) overall, and highest among respondents of the European programme (32/36). The most adopted platform was ChatGPT (60/69; 87%), and the most common application was analytical coding assistance (63/69; 91%). Among AI users, most felt somewhat comfortable (34/69; 49%) or comfortable (24/69; 35%) with AI and reported weekly (29/69; 42%) or daily (21/69; 30%) use. Generally, AI's reported impact was positive. Challenges included technical difficulties, accuracy concerns, bias introduction, uncertainty regarding permissible uses, and data privacy issues. Among respondents, 47% (49/105) affirmed having AI policies/guidelines in their institutions and 20% (21/105) had received AI training.CONCLUSIONTo further incorporate AI use among its fellows, FETPs should monitor AI's evolving role, and provide guidance and adapt curricula accordingly.
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.