Cited by 286Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence ApplicationsEthics and Social Impacts of AI

Health Care Employees’ Perceptions of the Use of Artificial Intelligence Applications: Survey Study

Open access
Abdullah, Rana, Fakieh, Bahjat·2020·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: The advancement of health care information technology and the emergence of artificial intelligence has yielded tools to improve the quality of various health care processes. Few studies have investigated employee perceptions of artificial intelligence implementation in Saudi Arabia and the Arabian world. In addition, limited studies investigated the effect of employee knowledge and job title on the perception of artificial intelligence implementation in the workplace. Objective: The aim of this study was to explore health care employee perceptions and attitudes toward the implementation of artificial intelligence technologies in health care institutions in Saudi Arabia. Methods: An online questionnaire was published, and responses were collected from 250 employees, including doctors, nurses, and technicians at 4 of the largest hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Results: The results of this study showed that 3.11 of 4 respondents feared artificial intelligence would replace employees and had a general lack of knowledge regarding artificial intelligence. In addition, most respondents were unaware of the advantages and most common challenges to artificial intelligence applications in the health sector, indicating a need for training. The results also showed that technicians were the most frequently impacted by artificial intelligence applications due to the nature of their jobs, which do not require much direct human interaction. Conclusions: The Saudi health care sector presents an advantageous market potential that should be attractive to researchers and developers of artificial intelligence solutions.

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 · 10.2196/17620

Cites

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?

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 23 · Cited by 286

Authors
Abdullah, R., & Fakieh, B.
Affiliations
King Abdulaziz University (SA)
Corresponding author
Fakieh, Bahjat
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2020-05-14
Volume
22
Issue
5
Pages
e17620
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3012391191
Cited by
286
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 81 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 2
FWCI
6.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • 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 › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Keywords
artificial intelligence, healthcare workers, employee perceptions, attitudes toward AI, job displacement fears, AI knowledge, health information technology, hospital staff
MeSH terms
Adult, Artificial Intelligence, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Workplace, Young Adult

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