RESEARCH PAPER
The attitude of the Polish medical community toward the use of artificial intelligence in medicine
More details
Hide details
1
Student Research Group at the Dr Władysław Biegański Collegium Medicum, Jan Długosz University, Armii Krajowej St. 13/15, 42-200 Częstochowa, Poland
2
Student Research Group at the Chair and Department of Pathomorphology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, 3 Maja St. 13, 41-800 Zabrze, Poland
3
Department of Pathomorphology, Faculty of Medical Sciences in Zabrze, Medical University of Silesia, 3 Maja St. 13, 41-800 Zabrze, Poland
4
Collegium Medicum named after Dr Władysław Biegański, Jan Długosz University, Armii Krajowej St. 13/15, 42-200 Częstochowa, Poland
These authors had equal contribution to this work
Submission date: 2026-02-27
Final revision date: 2026-04-23
Acceptance date: 2026-04-26
Online publication date: 2026-06-08
Publication date: 2026-06-08
Corresponding author
Julia Faustyna Bednarek
Student Research Group at the Dr Władysław Biegański Collegium Medicum, Jan Długosz University, Armii Krajowej St. 13/15, 42-200 Częstochowa, Poland
Pol. Ann. Med. 2026;33:191-196
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used in medicine to support
diagnosis, treatment and data management. However, its implementation raises
significant ethical, legal and social concerns regarding the doctor–patient relationship.
Aim:
This study examined the level of trust in medical AI among medical professionals and students. It focused on identifying factors influencing acceptance and concerns.
Material and methods:
The survey targeted medical students, doctors, nurses, midwives, paramedics, dentists and academic teachers. The questionnaire contained 36 questions including 30 single choice and 6 multiple choice options. The survey was distributed in paper form at hospitals (20.0%), health centers (10.0%), universities (20.0%) and in electronic form (50.0%). All responses were collected anonymously. The results are presented descriptively and as pie charts. The survey was conducted from March to June 2025 among 682 individuals.
Results and discussion:
Most respondents had only a theoretical knowledge of AI, which they had mainly acquired independently. Practical experience was rare, confirming the limited implementation of this technology. AI’s potential was assessed positively, especially in radiology, oncology and medical administration. There was a preference for collaborative models supervised by doctors. Key concerns included the risk of errors, lack of legal responsibility and the impact
on patient relationships. Respondents emphasized the need for algorithm transparency,
legal-ethical regulations and formal education at every training stage.
Conclusions:
The medical community accepts AI primarily as a supportive tool, provided physician oversight is maintained. Findings highlight the need for physician education and clear legal-ethical regulations.
REFERENCES (18)
2.
Bułka J, Morkisz P, Wochlik I, Czuma P, Tomala M. Potencjał sztucznej inteligencji w sektorze ochrony zdrowia. In: Iloraz Sztucznej Inteligencji, 2023;4:20–56.
3.
Miotto R, Wang F, Wang S, et al. Deep learning for healthcare: Review, opportunities and challenges. Brief Bioinform. 2018;19(6):1236–1246.
https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bb....
4.
Denisiewicz N, Bielówka M, Mitręga A, Magiera M. Najlepsze zastosowania sztucznej inteligencji w radiologii. ArchaeGraph Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 2023.
5.
Johnson KB, Wei WQ, Weeraratne D, et al. Precision medicine, AI and the future of personalized healthcare. Clin Transl Sci. 2021;14(1):86–93.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cts.12....
6.
Kufel J, Lewandowski P. Innowacje w medycynie – przegląd wybranych technologii XXI wieku, 2023;27.
7.
Brawańska H, Jędrzejowska M, Lau K, Kasperczyk J. AI in medicine: An analysis of threats, risks and solutions for the future of healthcare. Ann Acad Med Siles. 2025;1(special issue).
9.
Karczan D. Odpowiedzialność odszkodowawcza za funkcjonowanie sztucznej inteligencji. Toruń, Poland: Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, 2022.
10.
Waller J, O’Connor A, Rafaat E, et al. Applications and challenges of artificial intelligence in diagnostic and interventional radiology. Pol J Radiol. 2022;87:113–117.
https://doi.org/10.5114/pjr.20....
13.
World Health Organization. Ethics and governance of artificial intelligence for health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2021. Available from:
https://www.who.int/publicatio.... Accessed: March 19, 2025.
14.
Madej M, Pogorzelska M, Wróblewski K, et al. Aspekty etyczne i perspektywy stosowania sztucznej inteligencji w medycynie. In: Sztuczna inteligencja w medycynie – aspekty praktyczne i perspektywy rozwoju. Warszawa, Poland: PZWL, 2023:33–45.
15.
Wojdan K, Moniuszko M. Sztuczna inteligencja w medycynie – stan aktualny i wyzwania wdrożeniowe. Forum Med Rodz. 2022;16(2):80–85.
https://doi.org/10.24425/nauka....
16.
European Commission. White paper on artificial intelligence – a European approach to excellence and trust. Brussels, Belgium: European Union, 2020. Available from:
https://ec.europa.eu/info/site.... Accessed: March 21, 2025.
17.
Kłak A, Gawińska E, Samoliński B, et al. Dr Google as the source of health information– the results of a pilot qualitative study. Pol Ann Med. 2017;24(2):188–193.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poam....