Cross-sectional study demonstrates high educational AI adoption alongside clinical skepticism in applied medical sciences students, indicating the need for targeted digital curriculum training.
Despite the growing use of AI in medical and health professions education, most existing research in Saudi Arabia has focused on medical and dental students, with limited data on Applied Medical Sciences students, who form a significant part of the workforce in direct patient care. Additionally, there remains a lack of understanding about students’ readiness, ethical awareness, and appropriate reliance on AI-based technologies. Understanding their knowledge and perceptions is crucial for developing evidence-based strategies that align with Saudi Vision 2030 goals for digital transformation in healthcare and education. An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted among third- and fourth-year Applied Medical Sciences students at King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences in Jeddah. Data were collected through an online questionnaire using a stratified sampling method to ensure gender representation. A total of 148 students completed the survey. Over 90% of students reported using AI-based educational tools to support their learning, mainly to enhance their understanding of specific topics. However, students had mixed opinions about using AI health chatbots for medical diagnosis or treatment, with 39.8% agreeing and 46.6% disagreeing that AI could assist in diagnosis or treatment planning. In conclusion, Applied Medical Sciences students demonstrated favorable knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions toward AI as an educational tool, while uncertainties remained regarding its use in clinical decision support. Tackling these issues with targeted educational programs and awareness efforts could enhance students’ digital skills and support national initiatives for healthcare transformation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaifi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: