MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413318664 · doi:10.2196/76574

Acceptance of AI-Powered Chatbots Among Physiotherapy Students: International Cross-Sectional Study

2025· article· en· W4413318664 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Salwa B. El-Sobkey, Kerolous Ishak Shehata Kelini, Mahmoud ElKholy, Tayseer Saber Abdeldayem, Muhammad S. Abdallah, D. Mohamed, Yomna F. Ahmed, Ayman El Khatib, Hind Khalid, Shaik Balkhis Banu, Ana Anjos, Mutasim D. Alharbi, Karim Fathy, Khaled Takey Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studyPhysical therapyPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Artificial intelligence-powered chatbots (AI-PCs) are increasingly integrated into educational settings, including health care disciplines. Despite their potential to enhance learning, limited research has investigated physiotherapy (PT) students' acceptance of this technology. Objective: This study aims to assess undergraduate PT students' acceptance of AI-PCs and to identify personal, academic, and technological factors influencing their acceptance. Methods: Over a 4-month period, a cross-sectional survey was conducted across 7 PT programs in 5 countries. Eligible participants were national undergraduate PT students. The technology acceptance model (TAM)-based questionnaire was used for capturing perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude, behavioral intention, and actual behavioral use of AI-PCs. The influence of personal, academic, and technological factors was examined. Descriptive and inferential statistics were conducted. Results: The mean total TAM score was 3.59 (SD 0.82), indicating moderate acceptance. Of the 1066 participants, 375 (35.2%) showed high acceptance, 650 (60.9%) moderate, and 41 (3.9%) low. Prior experience with artificial intelligence (AI) tools emerged as the strongest predictor of acceptance (β=.43; P<.001), followed by university affiliation (ANOVA P<.001). Cumulative grade point average percentage was positively correlated with TAM score (r=0.135; P<.001) but was not a significant predictor in regression (P=.23). Age (P=.54), sex (P=.56), academic level (P=.26), and current use of AI-PCs (P=.10) were not significant predictors. Conclusions: PT students demonstrated moderate acceptance of AI-PCs. Prior technological experience was the strongest predictor, underscoring the importance of early exposure to AI tools. Educational institutions should consider integrating AI technologies to enhance students' familiarity and foster positive attitudes toward their use.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.432 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical EducationSame topicAI in Service InteractionsFrench-language works237,207