Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Perceptions of students and healthcare workers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62954/g1qa3868Keywords:
Artificial intelligence, Healthcare, Ethics, Machine learning, Medical educationAbstract
Introduction:
Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing the healthcare sector by introducing new tools for diagnosis, treatment, and clinical management. However, its adoption largely depends on the acceptance and knowledge of healthcare professionals. This study evaluated the perceptions of medical students and healthcare workers regarding the use of AI in clinical practice.
Methods:
An observational, cross-sectional, descriptive, and prospective study was conducted between April and July 2025 at Hospital Ángeles Puebla. A total of 61 participants were surveyed using a digital questionnaire based on the National AI Survey 2030, which lacks formal psychometric validation and should be considered an exploratory diagnostic tool. Descriptive statistics and the Chi-square test were used to identify associations.
Results:
A total of 95.1% of respondents believe that AI has benefited or can benefit medicine, although 85.2% acknowledge its limitations. Despite 88.5% not having received formal training in AI, 72.1% have used some related tool. A significant difference by gender was found in the level of knowledge (p = 0.035), with greater familiarity among men. The main concerns focused on the doctor–patient relationship and clinical decision-making.
Conclusions:
In conclusion, there is a favorable attitude toward AI, accompanied by ethical and professional concerns. It is recommended to incorporate AI training into health sector educational programs and to establish regulatory frameworks that ensure its safe and patient-centered use.
References
1 Sinha R. The role and impact of new technologies on healthcare systems. Discov Health Syst. 2024;3(1):96.
2 van der Zander QEW, van der Ende-van Loon MCM, Janssen JMM, Winkens B, van der Sommen F, Masclee AAM, et al. Artificial intelligence in (gastrointestinal) healthcare: patients’ and physicians’ perspectives. Sci Rep. 2022;12:1–10.
3 Esteva A, Kuprel B, Novoa RA, Ko J, Swetter SM, Blau HM, et al. Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks. Nature. 2017;542:115–8.
4 Lugo-Reyes SO, Maldonado-Colín G, Murata C. Inteligencia artificial para asistir el diagnóstico clínico en medicina. Rev Alerg Mex. 2014;61(2):110–20. Disponible en: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=486755034010
5 Sivaraman V, Bukowski LA, Levin J, Kahn JM, Perer A. Ignore, trust, or negotiate: understanding clinician acceptance of AI-based treatment recommendations in health care. In: Proc CHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst. New York: ACM; 2023.
6 Bisdas S, Topriceanu CC, Zakrzewska Z, Irimia AV, Shakallis L, Subhash J, et al. Artificial intelligence in medicine: a multinational multi-center survey on medical and dental students’ perception. Front Public Health. 2021;9:795287.
7 Sit C, Srinivasan R, Amlani A, Muthuswamy K, Azam A, Monzon L, et al. Attitudes and perceptions of UK medical students towards artificial intelligence and radiology: a multicentre survey. Insights Imaging. 2020;11:14.
8 Solmonovich RL, Kouba I, Lee JY, Demertzis K, Blitz MJ. Physician awareness of, interest in, and current use of artificial intelligence large language model-based virtual assistants. PLoS One. 2025;20(5):e0320749.
9 Catalina QM, Fuster-Casanovas A, Vidal-Alaball J, Escalé-Besa A, Marin-Gomez FX, Femenia J, et al. Knowledge and perception of primary care healthcare professionals on the use of artificial intelligence as a healthcare tool. Digit Health. 2023;9:1–10.
10 Liu X, Barreto EF, Dong Y, Liu C, Gao X, Tootooni MS, et al. Discrepancy between perceptions and acceptance of clinical decision support systems: implementation of artificial intelligence for vancomycin dosing. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023;23(1):1–10.
11 Viechtbauer W, Smits L, Kotz D, Budé L, Spigt M, Serroyen J, et al. A simple formula for the calculation of sample size in pilot studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(11):1375–9.
12 CIAPEM. Encuesta nacional de inteligencia artificial [Internet]. 2018.Disponible en: https://ciapem.org/encuesta-nacional-de-inteligencia-artificial/
13 Beets B, Newman TP, Howell EL, Bao L, Yang S. Surveying public perceptions of artificial intelligence in health care in the United States: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e40337.
14 Chen M, Zhang B, Cai Z, Seery S, Gonzalez MJ, Ali NM, et al. Acceptance of clinical artificial intelligence among physicians and medical students: a systematic review with cross-sectional survey. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:990604.
15 Vo V, Chen G, Aquino YSJ, Carter SM, Do QN, Woode ME. Multi-stakeholder preferences for the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare: a systematic review and thematic analysis. Soc Sci Med. 2023;338:116302.
16 Chew HSJ, Achananuparp P. Perceptions and needs of artificial intelligence in health care to increase adoption: scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2022;24:e32939.
17 Ng JY, Maduranayagam SG, Suthakar N, Li A, Lokker C, Iorio A, et al. Attitudes and perceptions of medical researchers towards the use of artificial intelligence chatbots in the scientific process: an international cross-sectional survey. Lancet Digit Health. 2024;6.
18 Mittermaier M, Raza MM, Kvedar JC. Bias in AI-based models for medical applications: challenges and mitigation strategies. npj Digit Med. 2023;6:1–3.
19 Davenport T, Kalakota R. The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare. Future Healthc J. 2019;6(2):94–8.
20 Luchini C, Pea A, Scarpa A. Artificial intelligence in oncology: current applications and future perspectives. Br J Cancer. 2022;126:4–9.
21 Sun J, Lu T, Shao X, Han Y, Xia Y, Zheng Y, et al. Practical AI application in psychiatry: historical review and future directions. Mol Psychiatry. 2025.
22 Russo C, Romano L, Clemente D, Iacovone L, Gladwin TE, Panno A. Gender differences in artificial intelligence: the role of artificial intelligence anxiety. Front Psychol. 2025;16:1–10.
23 Yuan PHS, Yan TD, Sharma S, Chahley E, MacLean LJ, Freitas V, et al. Authorship gender among articles about artificial intelligence in breast imaging. Eur J Radiol. 2024;175:111401.
24 Murray G, Vasdev RMS, Ellythy L, He T, Sethi A, Cooper M, et al. Gender authorship among urology artificial intelligence publications: a 10-year retrospective analysis. Urology. 2025.
25 Omar M, Sorin V, Agbareia R, Apakama DU, Soroush A, Sakhuja A, et al. Evaluating and addressing demographic disparities in medical large language models: a systematic review. Int J Equity Health. 2025;24:1–12.
26 Marko JGO, Neagu CD, Anand PB. Examining inclusivity: the use of AI and diverse populations in health and social care: a systematic review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2025;25:1–12.
27 Quinn TP, Senadeera M, Jacobs S, Coghlan S, Le V. Trust and medical AI: the challenges we face and the expertise needed to overcome them. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021;28(4):890–4.
28 Cinà G, Röber T, Goedhart R, Birbil I. Why we do need explainable AI for healthcare. 2022.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Iván Romarico González Espinoza, Antonio de Lorenzo Hernández, Edgar Martínez Romero, Abraham Castro Ponce, Gabriela Juárez Salazar, Farid Alejandro Carrasco Gutiérrez, Dannahí Yereni Delgado Carmona, Lizeth Tatiana Camargo Cuenca (Autor/a)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
