Cited by 56Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in EducationInnovations in Medical Education

Healthcare students’ knowledge, attitudes, and perspectives toward artificial intelligence in the southern Vietnam

Open access
Truong, Nguyen Minh, Vo, Trung Quang, Tran, Hien Thi Bich, Nguyen, Hiep Thanh, Pham, Van Nu Hanh·2023·Heliyon

Abstract

The application of new technologies in medical education still lags behind the extraordinary advances of AI. This study examined the understanding, attitudes, and perspectives of Vietnamese medical students toward AI and its consequences, as well as their knowledge of existing AI operations in Vietnam. A cross-sectional online survey was administered to 1142 students enrolled in undergraduate medicine and pharmacy programs. Most of the participants had no understanding of AI in healthcare (1053 or 92.2 %). The majority believed that AI would benefit their careers (890 or 77.9 %) and that such innovation will be used to oversee public health and epidemic prevention on their behalf (882 or 77.2 %). The proportion of students with satisfactory knowledge significantly differed depending on gender (P < 0.001), major (P = 0.003), experience (P < 0.001), and income (P = 0.011). The percentage of respondents with positive attitudes significantly differed by year level (P = 0.008) and income (P = 0.003), and the proportion with favorable perspectives regarding AI varied considerably by age (P = 0.046) and major (P < 0.001). Most of the participants wanted to integrate AI into radiology and digital imaging training (P = 0.283), while the fifth-year students wished to learn about AI in medical genetics and genomics (P < 0.001, 4.0 ± 0.8). The male students had 1.898 times more adequate knowledge of AI than their female counterparts, and those who had attended webinars/lectures/courses on AI in healthcare had 4.864 times more adequate knowledge than those having no such experiences. The majority believed that the barrier to implementing AI in healthcare is the lack of financial resources (83.54 %) and appropriate training (81.00 %). Participants saw AI as a "partner" rather than a "competitor", but the majority of low knowledge was recorded. Future research should take into account the way to integrate AI into medical training programs for healthcare students.

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 · 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22653

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • Study participants did not believe AI would replace human teachers but believed that the role of the teacher may change.

    “In addition, study participants did not believe AI would replace human teachers [49] but that the role of the teacher may change [3].”

    From Artificial intelligence in undergraduate medical education: an updated scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [49]

    The Discussion’s ‘Impact of AI on doctors and pharmacists’ section reports that over 79% of participants believed those healthcare professionals would still be needed. It does not report participants’ beliefs about replacing human teachers; searches for teacher replacement found no such finding. The separate claim that teachers’ roles may change is cited to another source [3]. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [43]Wood E.A. Ange B.L. Miller D.D. Are we ready to integrate artificial intelligence literacy into medical school curriculum: students and faculty survey J. Med. Educ. Curric. Dev. 8 2021 23821205211024078 PMC8239949 34250242
  2. [44]Kansal R. Differences in knowledge and perspectives on the usage of artificial intelligence among doctors and medical students of a developing country: a cross-sectional study Cureus 14 1 2022 PMC8860704 35223222
  3. [50]Pinto Dos Santos D. Medical students' attitude towards artificial intelligence: a multicentre survey Eur. Radiol. 29 4 2019 1640 1646 29980928

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Truong, N. M., Vo, T. Q., Tran, H. T. B., Nguyen, H. T., & Pham, V. N. H.
Affiliations
  • Pham Ngoc Thach University of Medicine (VN)
  • Hanoi University of Pharmacy (VN)
Corresponding author
Vo, Trung Quang
Venue
Heliyon
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-12
Volume
9
Issue
12
Pages
e22653
ISSN
2405-8440 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4388914760
Cited by
56
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 13
FWCI
2.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Heliyon (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, medical students, pharmacy students, AI knowledge, attitudes toward AI, artificial intelligence in medical education, AI adoption barriers, gender differences, AI training needs, Vietnam

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