Back

The Verification Gap: Artificial Intelligence Adoption, Hallucination Awareness, and Verification Practices Among Early Career Medical Researchers in Pakistan

Sajjad, M.

2026-05-30 health informatics
10.64898/2026.05.28.26354373 medRxiv
Show abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools have been rapidly adopted by medical researchers, yet whether early career researchers in low and middle income countries possess the awareness and habits needed to use these tools safely remains poorly documented. This study characterized AI adoption patterns, hallucination awareness, and verification and disclosure practices among early career medical researchers in Pakistan. A cross sectional anonymous online survey was conducted among medical students, house officers, residents, physicians, and faculty involved in research or academic work across Pakistan (May 2026). Descriptive statistics and chi square tests were applied to 373 eligible responses. AI use was near universal (99.7%), with 60.3% using AI tools daily. The most commonly reported tool in this sample was Claude (40.5%), followed by ChatGPT (29.2%) and Perplexity (26.0%), though this ranking likely reflects sampling characteristics. Despite high adoption, 59.2% typically did not verify AI outputs before use, and 40.2% had never heard that AI can generate fabricated scientific references. In behavioral vignettes, 36.5% assumed convincing AI generated references were authentic, and 54.2% would continue using remaining AI content after discovering one fabricated reference. Formal research training was strongly associated with consistent disclosure (51.7% vs. 17.1%; chi square=48.43, p less than 0.001). Role, daily use frequency, and research training were not significantly associated with verification behavior. Early career medical researchers in Pakistan demonstrate high AI adoption alongside incomplete hallucination awareness and infrequent verification, a pattern that may carry implications for research integrity. Formal training was the only factor significantly associated with consistent disclosure. Integration of AI literacy into medical curricula and institutional governance frameworks merits consideration.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.9%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.9%
3
DIGITAL HEALTH
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.2%
4
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.7%
5
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 29%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
6
International Journal of Medical Informatics
26 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.0%
7
Public Health
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.3%
8
BMC Medical Education
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.3%
9
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.9%
10
Frontiers in Public Health
148 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
11
JMIR Formative Research
33 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.2%
12
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.2%
13
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
14
JMIRx Med
32 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
15
JAMA
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
16
Frontiers in Microbiology
427 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.9%
17
Healthcare
17 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
18
Medicine
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
19
Frontiers in Digital Health
24 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
20
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
22
JAMIA Open
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
23
BioMed Research International
28 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
24
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
26
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
27
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
BMC Medical Research Methodology
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
Frontiers in Pharmacology
111 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
30
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%