ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2026
Primary Care Doctors' Perspectives and Experiences With a Chest X-Ray AI Triage Program: Qualitative Study.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: AI has the potential to support chest X-ray (CXR) triage in primary care, but adoption depends on whether clinicians perceive its outputs as credible, useful, and workable within routine clinical workflows. Evidence on how primary care doctors experience AI-supported CXR triage in real-world practice remains limited. Objective: This study explored primary care doctors' perspectives on a pilot CXR-AI program and identified barriers and enablers influencing adoption during early implementation. Methods: We conducted a qualitative descriptive study in a Singapore public primary care center where an AI system was embedded into the CXR workflow as a triage tool. Doctors who had used the program in clinical practice were purposively sampled across age, gender, and clinical seniority. Data were collected through semistructured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Twenty primary care doctors participated in 10 in-depth interviews and 2 focus group discussions. Adoption was variable and shaped by three interconnected themes: (1) AI validity and workflow integration, (2) clinician beliefs and confidence, and (3) organizational culture. Initial engagement appeared to be shaped by whether doctors understood the program's purpose, perceived a need to change existing practice, and were open to workflow change. Continued use was shaped by the perceived accuracy of the AI tool and its usefulness in clinical practice. Doctors perceived the AI tool as more valuable when they were confident in CXR interpretation. Institutional endorsement, phased implementation, positive peer experiences, and the safety net provided by continued radiologist reporting helped build trust. However, concerns about AI overcalling, lack of clinical context and interaction, and medicolegal responsibility limited clinicians' willingness to rely on AI alone. Conclusions: Adoption of AI-supported CXR triage in primary care depended not only on the technology itself, but also on how it was introduced, understood, and experienced in practice. These findings support the need for implementation strategies that are responsive to end user perspectives and contextualized within local workflows and clinical settings. Further research should examine later-stage implementation outcomes and objective operational and clinical outcomes of the program.
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.