Online survey assessing US primary care physicians’ attitudes toward AI use in clinical administrative tasks
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: To examine primary care physicians' attitudes regarding artificial intelligence (AI) use for administrative clinical tasks. METHODS: Web-based survey with US physicians in family medicine or internal medicine (N=420, response rate 5.13%). Two hypothetical AI tools for administrative clinical activities were described. We examined physicians' attitudes towards AI tools, and their associations with practice years, exposure to AI, use case and stakeholder type were evaluated using generalised estimating equations. RESULTS: Participants were on average 49.6 years (SD=12.5) and 56.7% men (238/420). Physicians with fewer practice years were more likely to endorse the tools' benefits (OR 1.70-1.96), the tools' benefits outweighing risks (OR 1.79-2.06) and their openness to use (OR 1.63-1.83), and were less likely to endorse disclosure of AI use (OR 0.60 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.998)). Physicians with AI exposure were more likely to agree the tools' benefits outweighed their risks (OR 1.51 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.16)). Physicians were more likely to endorse the tools' benefit to physicians (OR 4.94 (95% CI 4.16 to 5.86)) and physicians' openness to using them (OR 3.53 (95% CI 2.97 to 4.20)) than they were to endorse their benefit to patients and patients' openness. Physicians rated an AI tool for notes generation as more beneficial than one for billing assistance (OR 1.73 (95% CI 1.39 to 2.16)). DISCUSSION: Although the findings are preliminary, US primary care physicians' attitudes toward AI for clinical administration varied by practice years, prior exposure to AI, use case and stakeholder type. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight opportunities to develop training and implementation strategies in service of advancing safe and effective integration of administrative AI tools in primary care.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Online survey assessing US primary care physicians’ attitudes toward AI use in clinical administrative tasks
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2026
- Éditeur
- BMJ
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Stanford University Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences — Stanford University.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.