Medical Clinical Minds Meet Artificial Intelligence: Italian Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Concordance between Italian Physicians and AI-Generated Diagnoses. A National Cross-Sectional Study
Cofini, V.; Muselli, M.; Piccardi, L.; Benvenuti, E.; Di Pangrazio, G.; Mancinelli, M.; Cimino, E.; Palermo, P.; Petrucci, E.; Picchi, G.; Tobia, L.; Barbonetti, A.; Desideri, G.; Fabiani, L.; Guido, M.; Marinangeli, F.; Necozione, S.
Show abstract
BackgroundArtificial Intelligence has increasingly been integrated into clinical practice, yet its adoption and perception among medical professionals remain poorly understood, particularly in the Italian healthcare system. To investigate Italian physicians knowledge, attitudes, and clinical concordance with AI-generated diagnostic recommendations, using a validated questionnaire and a clinical scenario processed by ChatGPT. MethodsA national, cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among 587 Italian physicians using an online validated questionnaire. The first part of the questionnaire assessed self-reported knowledge, prior experience, attitudes, and willingness to adopt AI in medicine. The second part assessed clinical concordance between AI proposals and physicians about clinical cases evaluated by ChatGPT. Results Most participants reported basic AI knowledge (n=380, 64.8%) and minimal exposure to AI training (18.4%). Only 21.6% reported they used AI in clinical practice, and the most familiar application was diagnostic imaging (35.4% of AI users; 7.7% of the total sample). Major perceived barriers included lack of training (76.7%) and resistance to change (50.9%). In the universal clinical scenario, physicians showed the highest agreement with ChatGPTs correct diagnosis (mean=4.07) compared to incorrect alternatives (mean=2.57 and 1.82, p<0.001). For correct diagnosis, the agreement rate was very high at 89% [86%-91%]. ConclusionsItalian physicians showed a strong interest in adopting AI tools, despite significant knowledge gaps and limited practical experience. The high concordance between physicians evaluations and ChatGPTs diagnostic insights suggests potential for AI-based decision support in clinical workflows. Targeted training and institutional support are essential to bridge the gap between enthusiasm and readiness for AI integration.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Large language models for generating medical examinations: systematic review 97%
- Medical students' perceptions towards artificial intelligence in education and practice: A multinational, multicenter cross-sectional study 96%
- Performance of ChatGPT on Chinese National Medical Licensing Examinations: A Five-Year Examination Evaluation Study for Physicians, Pharmacists and Nurses 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Theory of radiologist interaction with instant messaging decision support tools: a sequential-explanatory study 96%
- Benefits and Challenges of Using Virtual Primary Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: From Key Lessons to a Framework for Implementation 95%
- Harnessing the Open Access Version of ChatGPT for Enhanced Clinical Opinions 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluating user experience with immersive technology in simulation-based education: a modified Delphi study with qualitative analysis 94%
- Protocol For Human Evaluation of Artificial Intelligence Chatbots in Clinical Consultations 94%
- Development of the AD F ICE_IT clinical decision support system to assist deprescribing of fall-risk increasing drugs: A user-centered design approach 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Assessment of Accuracy and Safety of LabTest Checker (LTC-AI) 96%
- Evaluating the impact on clinical task efficiency of a natural language processing algorithm for searching medical documents: Prospective crossover study 96%
- Transformative potential of Large Language Models in data mining on Electronic Health Records. 95%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.