ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Attitudes Toward Large Language Models in Health Care and Preferences for Their Adoption and Oversight Among Health Care Professionals: Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly entering health care, but limited empirical data exist on health care professionals' perceptions. Understanding health care professionals' attitudes is essential for responsible implementation as LLMs transition from experimental to routine tools. Objective: To characterize health care professionals' perspectives on LLM use in health care, including exposure, knowledge, perceived clinical utility, safety and bias concerns, and oversight preferences. Methods: This cross-sectional survey was distributed online through a health care news platform mailing list. A total of 335 health care professionals responded, including attending physicians (n=230, 68.7%), residents or fellows, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and researchers. Most were aged 30 to 59 years (n=243, 72.5%) and practiced in the Northeast United States (n=261, 77.9%). Outcomes included LLM use patterns, knowledge levels, perceived applications, safety and bias concerns, and preferences for regulatory oversight. Analyses included descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Results: Of 335 participants, 62.7% (n=210) reported current or contemplated LLM use. Users reported significantly higher self-reported knowledge than nonusers ( Conclusions: In this exploratory convenience sample, health care professionals reported early adoption of LLMs for lower-risk tasks while expressing concerns about safety, bias, and governance. Given the low response rate and recruitment through a health care innovation-focused mailing list, these findings may not reflect the views of the broader health care professional population. Respondents preferred professional organizations over industry for oversight and suggested that successful integration of LLMs into health care will require careful planning, human supervision, transparent disclosure, and auditing. Future studies using more representative sampling methods are needed to better characterize health care professionals' attitudes toward LLMs.
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.