Articlenpj health systems2026
Receptiveness of physicians towards artificial intelligence-driven drug prescription: a nationwide survey.
Article in npj health systems, 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
41 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Using artificial intelligence (AI) to prescribe drugs has advanced slowly. Whether a "doctor-in-the-loop" design would increase acceptance of drug-prescribing AI is unknown, as are settings where physicians envision AI-driven drug prescription most likely to be implemented. We surveyed a stratified sample of 2708 physicians throughout China to interrogate their opinions on drug-prescribing AI. Most respondents (78%) are receptive to using drug-prescribing AI and anticipate doing so within 5 years. Respondents suggested initial settings for AI-driven drug prescribing include situations where there are standard guidelines (74%), where the decision is whether to continue a current prescription in someone (55%), and where prescribing decisions rely on high-complexity clinical data (44%). Many (66%) indicated a preference for conditional to fully autonomous drug-prescribing AI. Clustering analysis identified 2 psychological profile-types, "optimists" and "pragmatists", who have different standards for model efficacy, expediency, explainability, and governance/stewardship for drug-prescribing AI. A high level of using medical AI is the strongest predictor for being an optimist (OR = 2.98 [2.53, 3.51]; P < 0.0001). In conclusion, our data point to the wide acceptability of conditional autonomous drug-prescribing AI among Chinese physicians. Moreover, disparity in optimism about drug-prescribing AI is caused by disparity in prior exposure to medical AI.
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.