Cited by 21Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation

Patient experiences, attitudes, and profiles regarding artificial intelligence in rheumatology: a German national cross-sectional survey study

Open access
Labinsky, Hannah, Klemm, Philipp, Graalmann, Lukas, Thiele, Thea, Hornig, Johannes, Fink, Daniel, Morf, Harriet, Mucke, Johanna +8 more·2025·Rheumatology International

Abstract

While artificial intelligence (AI) is gaining attention in rheumatology, little is known about patient perspectives. This study addresses this gap by examining patients’ experiences and attitudes toward AI. A nationwide, cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted between March and May 2025 among adult patients with rheumatic diseases in Germany. Data were analyzed descriptively and with cluster analysis. A total of 778 patients completed the survey (70.4% female, mean age 51.3 years). The most common diagnosis was rheumatoid arthritis (31.7%). While 26.8% reported current AI use for health-related purposes, 57.8% expressed interest in using it. Patients were particularly interested in AI-based symptom checkers (64.3%), therapy recommendations (50.6%), and chatbots for medical inquiries (44.5%). 57.6% of patients indicated that they would welcome their rheumatologists using AI-based clinical suppport. The most frequently cited benefits of AI included improved information access (63.5%) and faster diagnosis (57.7%), while concerns centered on faulty AI (74.3%) and reduced human interaction (59.6%). Cluster analysis identified three distinct patient profiles: ‘AI-savvy’ (41.4%), ‘AI-pragmatic’ (44.8%), and ‘AI-skeptical’ (13.8%). Cluster membership was significantly associated with age and education, with younger patients more often belonging to the ‘AI-savvy’ group. Patients with rheumatic diseases showed substantial interest in AI-supported care, although actual use in medical contexts remained limited. Age and education differences highlight the need for tailored implementation strategies to ensure equitable and patient-centered adoption of AI in rheumatology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00296-025-06023-x

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Rheumatic patients and rheumatologists both agree that diagnostic decision support is the most relevant field of implementation in rheumatology for LLMs.

    “surveys demonstrated that rheumatic patients and rheumatologists both agree that diagnostic decision support is the most relevant field of implementation in rheumatology for LLMs [6, 12].”

    From Diagnostic performance of Prof. Valmed, ChatGPT-5 Thinking, and OpenEvidence in rheumatology: A comparative evaluation (2026) · cites this paper as [12]

    The Results (Current and Potential Use Cases of AI in Rheumatology; page unavailable) report that patients were most interested in AI-based symptom checkers, and the Conclusion says patients and rheumatologists share priorities around diagnostics and education. The paper does not establish that both groups ranked diagnostic decision support as the single most relevant application, or that their rankings concerned LLMs specifically rather than AI more broadly. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In a recent large national survey, the majority of patients stated that they would welcome their rheumatologists using AI for clinical decision support.

    “Importantly, in a recent large national survey, the majority of patients stated that they would welcome their rheumatologists using AI for clinical decision support [12].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Labinsky, H., Klemm, P., Graalmann, L., Thiele, T., Hornig, J., Fink, D., Morf, H., Mucke, J., Kiltz, U., Pecher, A.-C., Pfeil, A., Elling-Audersch, C., Bendzuck, G., Krusche, M., Hueber, A. J., & Knitza, J.
Affiliations
  • Universitätsklinikum Würzburg (DE)
  • Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
  • Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
  • Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
  • Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet (DE)
  • Universitätsklinikum Tübingen (DE)
  • Jena University Hospital (DE)
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
  • Philipps University of Marburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Knitza, Johannes
Venue
Rheumatology International
Published
2025-11-10
Volume
45
Issue
12
Pages
269-269
ISSN
  • 0172-8172 (ISSN-L)
  • 1437-160X
OpenAlex
W4416094230
Cited by
20
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 20
FWCI
4.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Rheumatology International (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OPUS FAU (Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV), on behalf of the Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen-Nürnberg) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Common Library Network (Der Gemeinsame Bibliotheksverbund) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Philipps-Universität Marburg
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Keywords
artificial intelligence, rheumatic diseases, patient attitudes, patient experience, rheumatoid arthritis, chatbots, clinical decision support, patient characteristics, age and education differences, artificial intelligence adoption, trust in AI
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Artificial Intelligence, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Germany, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rheumatic Diseases, Rheumatology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review