Diagnostic accuracy
Do doctors think AI will take their jobs?
Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC
Among 669 Korean physicians/students, AI familiarity was low (5.9%) but 83.4% saw medical usefulness—especially for diagnosis—while only 35.4% thought AI could replace them.
How this study connects
Role on claims
Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.
Attitudes were surveyed with no accuracy benchmark in the study at all.
Clinician confidence is not calibrated to performance because it is measured independently of it. In an online survey, 83.4% rated artificial intelligence useful with diagnosis the top use case, while 43.9% endorsed diagnostic superiority and 35.4% expected job replacement.
Evidence for the claim as stated.
Study at a glance
- Design
- Cross-sectional — Online mobile survey of Korean physicians/medical students (11 items)
- N
- N=669 · 669 completed responses
- Population
- Korean doctors and medical students surveyed online
- Outcome
- Awareness of and attitudes toward medical AI usefulness, risks, and replacement
Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.
Inspect source passages
Do doctors think AI will take their jobs?
These passages occur verbatim in the stored paper text. They support the points listed below; they do not verify every statement in the explanation.
669 respondents; 5.9% good familiarity.
A total of 669 participants completed the survey. Only 40 (5.9%) answered that they had good familiarity with AI.
83.4% saw AI as useful / useful for diagnosis.
However, most participants considered AI useful in the medical field (558/669, 83.4% agreement).
Key findings
High perceived usefulness (83.4%) and diagnosis as top use case; concerns about unexpected situations (29.3%); minority endorsed diagnostic superiority (43.9%) or job replacement (35.4%).
Methodology
They fielded an 11-item Google Forms survey on AI recognition, attitudes, likely medical uses, and perceived risks.
Limitations
Attitudes are not performance benchmarks; a convenience online sample may not represent all clinicians.
Related papers in this topic
Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.