ArticleFrontiers in digital health2026
Artificial intelligence in pharmacy practice: pharmacists' perceptions and concerns toward implementation.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 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
Background: Integrating artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to transform healthcare. AI can enhance medication management, patient outcomes, and streamline pharmacy operations. However, addressing AI limitations and pharmacists' concerns is essential to fully grasp its real future potential in healthcare and its impact on the workforce. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a previously developed pilot-tested online questionnaire with demonstrated content validity and reliability among licensed pharmacists in the UAE. The questionnaire assessed participants' demographics, perceived benefits (9 items), and concerns/barriers (18 items) regarding AI implementation in pharmacy practice. Responses were recorded using a 5-point Likert scale. Perception scores were analyzed using descriptive statistics (mean ± standard deviation) to reflect the distribution of responses. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach's Results: A total of 400 participants were invited to participate in the study, of whom 340 returned completed questionnaires (response rate: 85%). Overall, participants reported positive perceptions of AI, particularly in relation to multitasking and rapid data analysis (4.1 ± 0.9), improved service quality (3.9 ± 1.0), and enhanced patient follow-up (3.8 ± 1.1). However, perceptions of AI's clinical impact were more moderate, including improved patient outcomes (3.5 ± 1.1), reduced medication errors (3.3 ± 1.2), and reduced healthcare costs (3.1 ± 1.2). Major concerns included cybersecurity risks (4.2 ± 0.8), data privacy issues (4.1 ± 0.9), and potential job displacement (3.9 ± 1.1). Conclusion: In this study, AI was perceived as a promising advancement in pharmacy practice, particularly in enhancing operational efficiency, multitasking, and patient follow-up. However, significant concerns were identified, including data privacy, cybersecurity, job displacement, and the potential loss of the human element in patient care. Addressing these concerns requires ensuring that AI complements, rather than replaces, pharmacists' roles, supported by updated education, targeted training, and clear regulatory frameworks.
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.