ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Navigating the artificial intelligence-informed patient: a cross-sectional study of physicians' perceptions and clinical practices.
Article in Frontiers in public 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Driven by advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) tools, patients are increasingly acquiring medical information independently. While existing literature focus on examining patients' use of AI tools, understanding physicians' perspective is essential for patient care. Currently, there is a lack of research examining physicians' perceptions and clinical practices regarding AI-informed patients, particularly concerning how these dynamics are influenced by physicians' sociodemographic factors. Objective: The study aimed to explore physicians' perceptions and practices towards patients' use of AI tools for health information seeking. It also assessed how their perceptions and practices differed given physician's sociodemographic characteristics. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted to assess perceptions and clinical practices related to patients' use of AI-based tools. Data were collected through an online questionnaire of physicians in Saudi Arabia. Data were analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistics. Results: A total of 393 physicians participated in the study, in which 66.7% of them encountered AI-informed patients. Overall, 54% were familiar with AI tools, 56.2% believed these tools empower patients, 40.5% reported a positive impact on the patient-physician relationship, and 78.4% identified risks regarding self-diagnosis. The majority of the physicians noted how AI-informed patients shaped their practices in terms of extended consultation time and challenged decision-making processes. Significant differences were found in physicians' perceptions and practices according to their age, gender, professional position, and healthcare sector. Conclusion: The findings of the study provide valuable insight to construct policies and guidelines to support the safe and effective utilization of AI-based tools. They also highlight the need for targeted patient awareness initiatives and highlight the need for developing physician training programs to effectively manage AI-informed patients and facilitate adaptation.
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.