Knowledge and perceptions of artificial intelligence in medical writing among medical and health sciences students: a comparative study of Saudi and Non-Saudi students
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To determine the knowledge, perceptions, and perceived benefits of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical writing among Saudi and non-Saudi undergraduate medical and health sciences students.
Methods: This comparative cross-sectional study was conducted from May to July 2024 among undergraduate medical and health sciences students enrolled at universities in Saudi Arabia and other countries. Using convenience sampling, 116 participants (52 non-Saudi and 64 Saudi students) were recruited. Data were collected using a structured, face-validated questionnaire assessing demographics, knowledge, perceptions, and perceived benefits of AI in medical writing. Data were analyzed using SPSS version-25.0.
Results: The mean age was higher among non-Saudi students than Saudi students (29.03±7.1 vs. 23.29±6.9 years). Overall, 109 (94.0%) participants demonstrated knowledge of AI, 108 (93.1%) reported positive perceptions, and 94 (81.0%) recognized its benefits in medical writing. No significant differences were observed between non-Saudi and Saudi students regarding knowledge (96.2% vs. 92.2%; p=0.372), positive perceptions (94.2% vs. 92.2%; p=0.720), or awareness of AI benefits (82.7% vs. 79.7%; p=0.681). The most frequently reported concerns included data privacy, accuracy and reliability of AI-generated content, and fear of being identified for using AI tools. Approximately half of the participants believed AI could potentially replace human medical writers.
Conclusion: Medical and health sciences students demonstrated high knowledge and positive perceptions regarding AI in medical writing irrespective of nationality. However, concerns regarding privacy, reliability, and ethical implications highlight the need for formal training on the responsible use of AI in medical education.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Work published in KMUJ is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online
(e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
References
1. Lanzetta M. Machine learning, deep learning, and artificial intelligence. In: Artificial intelligence for autonomous networks. Boca Raton (FL): Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2018. pp:25-47. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315360079-3
2. Gómez-González E, Gómez Gutiérrez E. Artificial intelligence in medicine and healthcare: applications, availability and societal impact. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2020. https://doi.org/10.2760/047666
3. Pellecchia R. Leveraging AI via speech-to-text and LLM integration for improved healthcare decision-making in primary care. 2022. [Accessed on: April 23, 2026]. Available from URL: https://www.politesi.polimi.it/handle/10589/218053.
4. Sarker IH. AI-based modelling: techniques, applications and research issues towards automation, intelligent and smart systems. SN Comput Sci 2022;3(2):158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01043-x
5. Ormond JL. Soft skills in higher education and graduate employability: a Delphi study [dissertation]. Huntsville (TX): Sam Houston State University; 2023. [Accessed on: April 23, 2026]. Available from URL: https://shsu-ir.tdl.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/d7c8d3a5-07ad-49b6-83a3-bbabdb9a6b56/content
6. Abeldina Z, Moldumarova Z, Abeldina R, Moldumarova ZI. Virtual learning space in the system of e-learning. Mediter J Soc Sci 2015;6(5):478-83. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n5p478
7. Fitria TN. Artificial intelligence (AI) in education: Using AI tools for teaching and learning process. Pros Sem Nas Call for Paper 2021;4(1):134-47.
8. Aydın Ö, Karaarslan E. Is ChatGPT leading generative AI? What is beyond expectations?. Acad Platform J Eng Smart Syst 2023;11(3):118-34. https://doi.org/10.21541/apjess.1293702
9. Buholayka M, Zouabi R, Tadinada A. The readiness of ChatGPT to write scientific case reports independently: a comparative evaluation between human and artificial intelligence. Cureus 2023;15(5):39386. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39386
10. Zaini R, Bin Abdulrahman K, Al-Khotani A, Al-Hayani A, Al-Alwan I, Jastaniah S. Saudi meds: a competence specification for Saudi medical graduates. Med Teach 2011;33(7):582-4. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2011.578180
11. Akinrinmade AO, Adebile TM, Ezuma-Ebong C, Bolaji K, Ajufo A, Adigun AO, et al. Artificial intelligence in healthcare: perception and reality. Cureus 2023;15(9):45594. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.45594
12. Topol E. Deep medicine: how artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. 1st edition 2019. Hachette UK. ISBN: 978-1541644632
13. Buabbas AJ, Miskin B, Alnaqi AA, Ayed AK, Shehab AA, Syed-Abdul S, Uddin M. Investigating students’ perceptions towards artificial intelligence in medical education. Healthcare 2023;11(9):1298. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11091298
14. Sit C, Srinivasan R, Amlani A, Muthuswamy K, Azam A, Monzon L, Poon DS. Attitudes and perceptions of UK medical students towards artificial intelligence and radiology: a multicentre survey. Insights Imaging 2020;11(1):14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0830-7
15. Park CJ, Paul HY, Siegel EL. Medical student perspectives on the impact of artificial intelligence on the practice of medicine. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol 2021;50(5):614-9. https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2020.06.011
16. Mehta N, Harish V, Bilimoria K, Morgado F, Ginsburg S, Law M, Das S. Knowledge of and attitudes on artificial intelligence in healthcare: a provincial survey study of medical students. Medrxiv 2021:2021-01. https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2021.000075.1
17. Civaner MM, Uncu Y, Bulut F, Chalil EG, Tatli A. Artificial intelligence in medical education: a cross-sectional needs assessment. BMC Med Educ 2022;22(1):772. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03852-3
18. Oh S, Kim JH, Choi SW, Lee HJ, Hong J, Kwon SH. Physician confidence in artificial intelligence: an online mobile survey. J Med Internet Res 2019;21(3):e12422. https://doi.org/10.2196/12422
19. Krittanawong C. The rise of artificial intelligence and the uncertain future for physicians. Eur J Int Med 2018;48:e13-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejim.2017.06.017
20. Inkster B, Sarda S, Subramanian V. An empathy-driven, conversational artificial intelligence agent (Wysa) for digital mental well-being: real-world data evaluation mixed-methods study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2018;6(11):e12106. https://doi.org/10.2196/12106
21. Ahmed Z, Bhinder KK, Tariq A, Tahir MJ, Mehmood Q, Tabassum MS, et al. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of artificial intelligence among doctors and medical students in Pakistan: A cross-sectional online survey. Ann Med Surg 2022;76:103493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2022.103493
22. Swed S, Alibrahim H, Elkalagi NKH, Nasif MN, Rais MA, Nashwan AJ, et al. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of artificial intelligence among doctors and medical students in Syria: a cross-sectional online survey. Front Artif Intell 2022;5:1011524. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.1011524
23. Al Saad MM, Shehadeh A, Alanazi S, Alenezi M, Eid H, Alfaouri MS, et al. Medical students’ knowledge and attitude towards artificial intelligence: an online survey. 2022;15(1):e187494452203290. https://doi.org/10.2174/18749445-v15-e2203290.