Attitudes of Primary Healthcare Centers Workers' towards Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The appearance of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has developed as a promising solution to develop healthcare efficiency and improve patient outcomes. The objective of the study was to assess the primary healthcare centers worker’s attitudes towards artificial intelligence in healthcare. Methods and Materials: A descriptive cross-sectional study design has been carried out from period 9 October, 2024 to 1st March, 2025. Non-probability (purposive) sample of (451) primary healthcare centers workers from (12) primary healthcare centers in Baghdad City centers, were selected to participate in the study. Data were collected through a self-report instrument that includes the socio-demographic data (age, sex, marital states, job description, educational qualification, years of experience and AI training), Likert scale of primary healthcare worker’s attitudes towards AI. The data were analyzed using the SPSS-26. Findings: The study results reveals that, more than quarter of the participant age (28.1-34) years (n=115;25.5%), The majority of the study participants didn’t participate in training course regarding artificial intelligence (96.7%). More than third of the study participants have 6-10 years’ experience in primary healthcare centers (34.6%). More than half of the study participant have positive attitudes towards artificial intelligence in healthcare (54.33%). There was a statistical significant positive correlation between the participants age, educational qualification, years of experience and the level attitudes towards artificial intelligence in healthcare (r=.208 at p <0.01: r=.396 at p<0.05: r=.136 at p =0.01) respectively. Conclusion: It can be concluded that more than half of primary healthcare centers workers have positive attitudes regarding artificial intelligence in healthcare.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it