Attitudes and perceptions of UK medical students towards artificial intelligence and radiology: a multicentre survey
OBJECTIVES: To explore the attitudes of United Kingdom (UK) medical students regarding artificial intelligence (AI), their understanding, and career intention towards radiology. We also examine the state of education relating to AI amongst this cohort. METHODS: UK medical students were invited to complete an anonymous electronic survey consisting of Likert and dichotomous questions. RESULTS: Four hundred eighty-four responses were received from 19 UK medical schools. Eighty-eight percent of stud
Record details
Published: 5 February 2020
Source: OpenAlex
Category: Research
Topics: Healthcare · Children & education
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Machine learning in medicine: Addressing ethical challenges
OpenAlex · 6 November 2018
Which professional (non-technical) competencies are most important to the success of graduate veterinarians? A Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) systematic review: BEME Guide No. 38
OpenAlex · 4 May 2016
Future of Work
UK Contracts Finder — AI procurement · 20 April 2026
Opinion: Making School Lunches Healthy Is Great – If Kids Will Eat What’s on the Tray
The 74 (education AI) · 7 August 2026
A future for the world's children? A WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission
OpenAlex · 1 February 2020
A vision of the use of technology in medical education after the COVID-19 pandemic
OpenAlex · 26 March 2020
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (5 February 2020), “Attitudes and perceptions of UK medical students towards artificial intelligence and radiology: a multicentre survey,” evidence record 8783, https://ethics.ai/record/8783 (originally published by OpenAlex).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.