Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Several revolutions are currently taking place in the healthcare industry to provide accurate, reliable, and valid healthcare to patients. Among these is artificial intelligence (AI).

OBJECTIVE

: This study aimed to assess the CP’s awareness, perceptions, and opinions of AI in health care among community pharmacists.

METHODS:

This cross-sectional survey-based study was conducted over 3 months in 2023 using structured prevalidated 34 items questionnaires.

RESULTS:

In this study, 94.5% ( $n=$ 258) of the CPs were aware of AI, yet 25.6% ( $n=$ 70) believed that AI would eventually replace healthcare professionals. However, 63.4% ( $n=$ 173) of the CPs concurred that AI is a technology that supports healthcare workers. 12.8% of the CPs believed that there is a risk of losing their jobs if AI is widely used in Saudi Arabia, but 68.9% ( $n=$ 188) of them considered that healthcare professionals will benefit from the extensive use of AI. Eighty-four percent of CPs ( $n=$ 232) agreed or strongly agreed that AI decreases drug mistakes in clinical practice. Similarly, 86% of the CPs ( $n=$ 235) concurred that AI makes it easier for patients to access the service. In contrast, almost 58% of the CPs ( $n=$ 232) agreed that AI makes it easier for healthcare professionals to acquire information, and 87.9% of the CPs ( $n=$ 240) said that AI helps them make better decisions.

CONCLUSION:

Keywords

Artificial intelligence awareness perceptions community pharmacists Saudi Arabia

1. Introduction

Several revolutions are currently taking place in the healthcare industry to provide accurate, reliable, and valid healthcare to patients [1, 2]. Among these is artificial intelligence (AI) [1, 2]. AI facilitates access to information for healthcare professionals such as pharmacists and physicians, as well as access to healthcare for patients, while reducing medication errors [2]. AI is defined as a computer-based technology or robotic system that can carry out tasks that would typically need human cognition [3]. Its applications in the field of health care could range from scientific research to decision-based health chores, among others [2, 3]. Robotics in the pharmacy helps with prescription filling and barcode-based medicine dispensing, and there is evidence that they minimize error rates, speed up prescription filling, and ensure that prescriptions are accurate [3].

Pharmacists are front-line healthcare professionals available to patients and customers, without prior appointment during their working hours [4, 5]. The role of a pharmacist in symptom monitoring, adherence tracking, or even delivery of therapy itself [6]. Furthermore, pharmacists play an integral role in leveraging technologies to improve patient experiences and outcomes. AI has grown in popularity both in the pharmacy and medical industries [6, 7]. Every pharmacist has a responsibility to provide pharmaceutical care, which lowers medication-related morbidity, mortality, and clinical outcomes while also enhancing the quality of life and reducing medical expenses. Furthermore, a success full pharmaceutical care is achieved by the collaboration of the patient – pharmacist relationships and delivery of adequate health care, errors, free prescribing, and reaching the medication promptly to the patients, which can be further possible by using advanced tools and computers such as robots in health care [6, 7].

The literature claims that pharmacists have employed AI in pharmacy settings to deliver data-driven therapies using Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS). With the use of this technology, pharmacists may sift through data and take action to avoid pharmaceutical mistakes, reduce patient difficulties, and lower expenses [8, 9]. For instance, earlier research discovered that the use of CDSS decreased the frequency of improper medicine use among elderly patients as well as drug-drug interactions (DDIs) [10]. Another recent study in Saudi Arabia that evaluated robotic pharmacy implementation and outcomes found that there was a decrease in patient wait times and an increase in overall patient satisfaction with pharmacy services [11]. In addition, the literature also revealed that there was no dispensing error rate in the pharmacy setting [11].

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has long been actively involved in pharmacy automation. The first robot-operated smart pharmacy in Saudi Arabia opened its doors in the Tabuk region in July 2018 [12]. This smart pharmacy assists to distribute up to 1,500 packages of medication an hour without any complications [12]. The robotic pharmacy can also process 240 prescriptions every hour, reject out-of-date medications, and store over 20,000 packages of medicine [12]. Six pharmacies are currently operating in Saudi Arabia, one of which specializes in treating people with strong will [12]. Studies on pharmacy automation often present an optimistic view of robotics, with the caveat that the original pack dispensing via robotic picking can be expected to deliver larger results in terms of dispensing speed than can unit-dose dispensing [11, 13].

Many factors influence the future use of AI by CPs, including the availability of trained CPs and its implementation in pharmacy outlets. Although CPs will need to be trained in the usage of AI, applications for dispensing in pharmacy, and healthcare organizations will need to invest in the development and implementation of AI systems in pharmacy outlets across the country. Furthermore, the successful integration of AI into a pharmacy will be dependent on the availability of data as well as the creation of ethical and regulatory frameworks to govern its usage. As the AI revolution continues, concerns have been expressed regarding its potential impact on pharmacy practice and healthcare results. Our study will investigate these concerns by assessing CPs’ awareness and understanding of the usage of AI in the pharmacy context. [11, 13]. Therefore, CPs’ knowledge, awareness, and perception of AI are essential. Hence, this study aimed to assess the CP’s awareness, perceptions, and opinions of AI.

2. Material and methods

2.1 Design, setting, and population

A cross-sectional study was carried out between March 1 ${}^{\text{st}}$ and May 2023 using a web-based online questionnaire in the Riyadh region, Saudi Arabia. The data was collected using prevalidated questionnaires adopted from the literature published elsewhere [2]. The targeted sample included CPs who are currently registered with Saudi counsel, reside in Saudi Arabia’s capital city, are over the age of 18, and can read and understand the questionnaires. Individuals who did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded from the study. Figure 1 shows detailed information about the study design. Furthermore, before carrying out the study, its protocol and questionnaires were reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Committee College of Medicine, King Saud University. In addition, this study was followed and conducted according to Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013 for human subjects, in addition, informed consent was obtained from the cps, before filling out the questionnaires.

Figure 1.

Flow chart of the study.

2.2 Sample size estimation

The required sample size was calculated using the Raosoft sample size calculator (http://www.raosoft. com/samplesize.html) with a 95% CI and a 5% margin of error (ME) and a population size of 20000. We don’t know the true number of registered CPs working in the Riyadh region of Saudi Arabia. Therefore, the required sample size for this study requires 377 participants.

2.3 Study tool and data collection

The questionnaire used for this study was adopted from previous studies and composed of 3 main sections with a total of 34 items [2]. Section one was composed of demographic details of the CPs and formed the first section of the questionnaire, comprised of a total of 7 multiple-choice questions relating to age, gender, nationality, current practice site, and the highest level of education. The second section of the study was composed of 4 statements in which CPs were asked about the awareness of AI and the effects of AI on job status, opinion on AI, and education about AI. All these items were measured and collected their answers. The third section consisted of 12 items that reflected the CP’s perception of AI in health care. The participants were asked to rate their level of agreement with these statements on a Likert scale ranging from agree to strongly disagree (1–5). The last section of the study composed of 9 items, collected CP’s opinions about the inclusion of AI in the curriculum, measured on a 3-point scale.

The initial draft of the questionnaire was subjected to content validity and face validity by the experts in the field (independent researchers and primary investigator) before the questionnaire was subjected to data collection. Furthermore, a pilot study was conducted among randomly selected CPs to check the understanding, clarity, and time taken to complete the study. The reliability of the questionnaires was checked using Cronbach’s $\alpha$ statistics, which was 0.857 which indicated that the questionnaires were reliable to carry out the study.

A convenient sampling strategy was used to recruit CPs. CPs were approached via social media (WhatsApp) for data collection. The information was gathered via a computerized questionnaire created on Google Forms. The form was created with an invitation letter at the beginning of the questionnaire and was distributed to the CPs via WhatsApp. Although studies in Saudi Arabia found that WhatsApp ${}^{\@setsize{\scriptsize}{9.5pt}{\viiipt}{\@viiipt}\textregistered}$ is widely used among adults and professionals [14], it was assumed that this would be an appropriate method of survey distribution to reach a diverse convenience sample from various regions of the city, and CPs were informed about the purpose of the study in the invitation letter. The information was gathered over three months using an online survey tool (Google Forms), and the results were stored in an encrypted database.

2.4 Data analysis

The data were analyzed using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences; version 26 for Windows; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Descriptive statistics like frequency (n) and percentages (%) were used to describe the demographic variables. A Chi square $\backslash$ Fisher exact test was used to find out the association between the variables at a $p$ -value $<$ 0.05 to be deemed statistically significant.

3. Results

A total of 273 community pharmacists (CPs) took part in this research. Among the whole sample, 91.9% were male, 8.1% ( $n=$ 22) were female, approximately 49% ( $n=$ 133) were between the age group of 26–30 years, and 27.8% ( $n=$ 76) were found between 31–35 years old. Nearly 45% ( $n=$ 121) of the surveyed CPs were qualified or obtained their degree from Saudi Arabia, and 41.4% ( $n=$ 113) of them were Saudi nationals. In this study, 37.4% ( $n=$ 102) of the CPs had 5–10 years of experience in practicing, while 28.2% of them found between 1–5 years of experience and the majority of the CPs graduated with a bachelor’s in pharmacy. Detailed information about the demographics were presented in Table 1.

Table 1
Demographics characters of the CPs

Characters	Frequency ( $n$ )	Percentage (%)
Gender
Male	251	91.9%
Female	22	8.1%
Age (years)
23–25	55	20.1%
25–30	133	48.7%
31–35	76	27.8%
$>$ 36	9	3.3%
Country of qualification
Saudi Arabia	121	44.3%
Other countries	152	55.7%
Nationality
Saudi	113	41.4%
Non-Saudi	160	58.6%
How long have you been a pharmacist?
$<$ 1 year	21	7.7%
1 to $<$ 5 years	77	28.2%
5 to $<$ 10 years	102	37.4%
10 to $<$ 20 years	67	24.5%
20 years or more	6	2.2%
Qualification
Bachelor in Pharmacy (Bpharm)	189	69.2%
Diploma Pharmacy	16	5.9%
PharmD	65	23.8%
Masters in Pharmacy	3	1.1%

In this study, 94.5% ( $n=$ 258) of the CPs were aware of AI, while 25.6% ( $n=$ 70) of them thought that AI would replace healthcare professionals in the healthcare setting. On the other hand, 63.4% ( $n=$ 173) of the CPs agreed that AI is a tool that helps healthcare professionals. If AI is widespread in Saudi Arabia, 12.8% of the CPs believed that there is a risk of losing their jobs, while 68.9% ( $n=$ 188) of them thought that healthcare professionals will be better with the widespread use of AI. About education about AI, 12.5% of the CPs received education about AI. The details of the CPs are given in Table 2.

Table 2

Awareness of the CPs toward AI

Characters	Frequency ( $n$ )	Percentage (%)
Are you familiar with the term artificial intelligence (AI)?
Yes	258	94.5%
No	15	5.5%
Do you think the medical profession will someday be replaced by robots or AI?
Agree	70	25.6%
Disagree	17	6.2%
It is a tool that aids healthcare personnel	173	63.4%
I don’t know	13	4.8%
What do you think of Saudi Arabia’s adoption of AI?
Risk of employment loss as a result of the use of robots and AI	35	12.8%
AI will be more widely used, which will benefit healthcare practitioners	188	68.9%
How AI is applied in that field will affect the specialization that is chosen	30	11.0%
I don’t know	20	7.3%
Have you undergone formal AI training?
Yes	34	12.5%
No	174	63.7%
Received training over the Internet/seminars and presentation	34	12.5%

According to the current study findings, 24.17 % ( $n=$ 66) of the CPs agreed or strongly agreed that AI lowers the value of the medical profession, whereas 48.3 % ( $n=$ 132) of them disagreed. However, the majority of CPs – 84.9% (mean $=$ 4.46; M $=$ 5.0; 95%Cl $=$ 4.35–4.56) agreed – or strongly agreed – that AI minimizes pharmaceutical errors in clinical practice ( $n=$ 232). Similarly, 86% of the CPs ( $n=$ 235) concurred that AI makes it easier for patients to access the service. In contrast, almost 58% of the CPs ( $n=$ 232) agreed that AI makes it easier for healthcare professionals to acquire information, and 87.9% of the CPs ( $n=$ 240) said that AI helps them make better decisions. Additionally, 80.9% of the CPs ( $n=$ 221) concurred that AI boosts patients’ trust in medical treatment. A little over 83% of the CPs ( $n=$ 225) concurred that AI aids in patient education. Although slightly more than half of the CPs (58%; $n=$ 159) disagreed that AI does have an adverse effect on the doctor-patient interaction. On the other hand, 58.9% of CPs ( $n=$ 161) disagreed that AI undermines the trust that serves as the cornerstone of the patient-healthcare professional relationship. The detailed responses of the perceptions of the CPs pharmacist towards AI are given in Table 3.

Table 3

Frequencies of Perceptions of the CPs pharmacist towards AI

Characters	Frequency (N)	Percentage (%)	Mean (Median) Likert score (95% CI)
AI devalues the healthcare profession
Agree	48	17.6%
Strongly agree	18	6.6%	2.81(M $=$ 2)
Neutral	58	21.2%	95%Cl $=$ 2.67–2.95
Disagree	132	48.4%
Strongly disagree	17	6.2%
AI reduces errors in medical practice
Agree	181	66.3%
Strongly agree	51	18.7%	4.46(M $=$ 5.0)
Neutral	28	10.3%	95%Cl $=$ 4.35–4.56
Disagree	11	4.0%
Strongly disagree	2	0.7%
AI facilitates patients’ access to the service
Agree	180	65.9%
Strongly agree	55	20.1%	4.47(M $=$ 5.0)
Neutral	25	9.2%	95%Cl $=$ 4.36–4.57
Disagree	11	4.0%
Strongly disagree	2	0.7%
AI facilitates healthcare professionals’ access to information
Agree	187	68.5%	3.49(M $=$ 4.0)
Strongly agree	45	16.5%	95%Cl $=$ 3.39–359
Neutral	29	10.6%
Disagree	12	4.4%
Strongly disagree
AI enables healthcare professionals to make more accurate decisions
Agree	194	71.1%
Strongly agree	46	16.8%	4.53(M $=$ 5.0)
Neutral	18	6.6%	95%Cl $=$ 4.42–4.63
Disagree	13	4.8%

Table 3, continued
Characters	Frequency (N)	Percentage (%)	Mean (Median) Likert score (95% CI)
Strongly disagree	2	0.7%
AI increases patients’ confidence in medicine
Agree	185	67.8%	4.39(M $=$ 5.0
Strongly agree	36	13.2%	95%Cl $=$ 4.27–4.51
Neutral	30	11.0%
Disagree	18	6.6%
Strongly disagree	4	1.5%
AI facilitates patient education
Agree	172	63.0%
Strongly agree	53	19.4%	4.37(M $=$ 5.0)
Neutral	26	9.5%	95%Cl $=$ 4.25–4.49
Disagree	21	7.7%
Strongly disagree	1	0.4%
AI negatively affects the relationship between healthcare professionals the patient
Agree	34	12.5%
Strongly agree	30	11.0%	2.72(M $=$ 2.00)
Neutral	50	18.3%	95%Cl $=$ 2.59–2.86
Disagree	144	52.7%
Strongly disagree	15	5.5%
AI damages the trust which is the basis of the patient-healthcare professional’s relationship
Agree	35	12.8%	2.71(M $=$ 2.00)
Strongly agree	28	10.3%	95%Cl $=$ 2.57–2.84)
Neutral	49	17.9%
Disagree	144	52.7%
Strongly disagree	17	6.2%
AI reduces the humanistic aspect of the medical profession
Agree	30	11.0%
Strongly agree	28	10.3%	2.63(M $=$ 2.00)
Neutral	50	18.3%	95%Cl $=$ 2.50–2.76
Disagree	141	51.6%
Strongly disagree	24	8.8%
AI violations of professional confidentiality may occur
Agree	26	9.5%	2.68(M $=$ 2.00)
Strongly agree	35	12.8%	95%Cl $=$ 2.55–2.81
Neutral	51	18.7%
Disagree	147	53.8%
Strongly disagree	14	5.1%
AI allows the patient to increase control over his health
Agree	145	53.1%	4.07(M $=$ 5.00)
Strongly agree	49	17.9%	95%Cl $=$ 3.93–421
Neutral	45	16.5%
Disagree	21	7.7%
Strongly disagree	13	4.8%

Concerning the inclusion of various courses about AI in the pharmacy curriculum, the majority 77.7%( $n=$ 212) of the CPs recommended included knowledge and skills about AI, while 81.3% of the CPs recommended including AI as an application for reducing medication errors (Table 4).

Table 4

Opinions of pharmacists about AI in the academic curriculum

Variables	Frequencies ( $n$ )	Percentiles (%)
Knowledge and skills about AI
Should be included	212	77.7%
Not sure	54	19.8%
No need to include	7	2.6%
AI as an application for reducing medication errors
Should be included	222	81.3%
Not sure	44	16.1%
No need to include	7	2.6%
AI-assisted risk analysis for diseases
Should be included	220	80.6%
Not sure	41	15.0%
No need to include	12	4.4%
AI Applications for assisting clinical decision making
Should be included	224	82.1%
Not sure	36	13.2%
No need to include	13	4.8%
AI’ assisted surveillance, filiation, and patient isolation in epidemics
Should be included	219	80.2%
Not sure	43	15.8%
No need to include	11	4.0%
AI-assisted emergency response
Should be included	221	81.0%
Not sure	40	14.7%
No need to include	12	4.4%
AI in scientific research
Should be included	213	78.0%
Not sure	50	18.3%
No need to include	10	3.7%
AI is a widely used preventative health mobile applications
Should be included	221	81.0%
Not sure	40	14.7%
No need to include	12	4.4%
A simplified lecture on AI, computer use, coding, Python language
Should be included	14	5.1%
Not sure	44	16.1%
No need to include	215	78.8%

Figure 2 depicts CPs’ perceptions of AI based on their academic qualifications. The four colors show the levels of agreement with the phrase “AI reduces errors in practice” among CPs. From left to right, the bar depicts CPs with Master, PharmD, bachelor’s, and diploma in pharmacy qualifications. A Chi-square test for the relationship between academic qualification and agreement level yielded a p-value of 0.004, with a bachelor’s in pharmacy qualification more likely to agree with the statement.

Figure 2.

The Association between Academic qualification and the Perceptions towards AI (AI reduces errors in practice).

Figure 3 depicts CPs’ perceptions of AI based on their academic qualifications. The four colors show the degrees of agreement with the phrase “Artificial intelligence (AI) facilitates healthcare professionals’ access to information” among CPs. A Chi-square test for the relationship between academic qualification and agreement level yielded a $p$ -value of $<$ 0.001, with a bachelor in pharmacy qualification more likely to agree with the statement.

Figure 3.

The association between academic qualification and the perceptions towards AI (AI facilitates healthcare professionals’ access to information).

Figure 4 depicts CPs’ perceptions of AI based on their academic qualifications. The four colors show the levels of agreement with the phrase “AI enables healthcare professionals to make more accurate decisions” among CPs. The bar displays CPs with Master, PharmD, bachelor’s, and diploma in pharmacy degrees. A Chi-square test for the relationship between academic qualification and agreement level yielded a $p$ -value of 0.001, with a bachelor’s in pharmacy qualification more likely to agree with the statement.

Figure 4.

The Association between Academic qualification and the Perceptions towards AI (AI enables healthcare professionals to make more accurate decisions).

4. Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study in Saudi Arabia that analyzed the awareness and views of AI among community pharmacies in the Riyadh region. There have been no studies in Saudi Arabia that evaluated the various features of AI using CPs. Although not much literature on AI in health care has been recognized internationally, some literature exists among students and other health care professionals [15, 16, 17, 18, 19] about AI use in medical devices, diagnostic medical imaging, data modeling, and cardiovascular health [20, 21, 22, 23]. This study would significantly advance healthcare, particularly in pharmacy outlets in community settings for the timely and safe distribution of medications to patients and individuals in Saudi Arabia and other nations, and it would act as a guide for further, required research. The results may be used by healthcare and educational institutions to develop pertinent course initiatives that will increase pharmacists’ and other healthcare professionals’ understanding of and respect for AI.

The current findings revealed that 95.4% of the CPs were aware of AI, the majority of the CPs reported that AI is a tool that helps healthcare professionals, and only 25.6% of the CPs agreed that AI might replace the healthcare force (pharmacists and physicians) in health care settings. Similar findings were reported in other countries. For instance, a recent study among practicing physicians and undergraduates reported that 70% of the respondents knew about AI and 23.7% of participants know about its application in the medical field [18]. Similarly, another recent study by Abdullah and Fakieh assessed Health Care Employees’ perceptions towards AI and reported that 74% of them were found to have good knowledge of AI, while 78% of them perceived that AI could replace humans and results in termination from their jobs [16]. In contrast, 11% of the CPs in the current study believed that AI lessens the humanistic component of the medical profession. These results were nevertheless superior to earlier research conducted among medical students by Jha et al., who found that 49% of participants strongly agreed that AI is reducing the number of employment available for healthcare professionals [15]. Similar results were found in recent research of medical students and doctors, which found that 25.5% of doctors and 23.4% of medical students agreed that AI might eventually replace human healthcare workers [17]. Even though another recent study revealed that more than 50% of participants were concerned about a potential decline in the services of healthcare staff [2]. These findings suggested that participants in the current study and previous studies were not fully aware of the benefits of AI, clearly indicating their unpreparedness for AI technology in health care.

CPs generally concur that AI reduces pharmaceutical errors in healthcare. This is in line with the results of a survey of medical professionals and students in a developing nation, which found that implementation of AI will decrease diagnostic errors while 3.2% of medical students and 6.3% of doctors strongly agreed and 27.1% of medical students and 30% of doctors agreed [17]. On the other hand, a recent study of medical students revealed that 70.5% of students agreed that AI reduces drug mistakes [2]. Applying AI algorithms to primary care settings has been demonstrated to reduce unneeded prescription errors, which lowers the need for ER visits, hospital admissions, and mortality [13].

In this study, 68.7% of the CPs agreed that AI improves healthcare professionals’ access to information, and the majority of the CPs (71.1%) agreed that AI allows healthcare professionals to make more accurate decisions, while 67.8% of the CPs agreed that AI boosts patients’ trust in medicine and 63% agreed that AI aids in patient health education. These findings were consistent with previous studies, which demonstrated that AI is an assistive tool that might improve physicians’ access to knowledge (85.8%) and patients’ access to healthcare (76.7%) [2]. Similarly, a recent study conducted among patients and their companions at a German tertiary referral hospital assessed their perceptions of AI and discovered that 53.18% of respondents had positive perceptions of the use of AI in medicine, while only 4.77% had negative perceptions of AI [19].

Qualifications of CPs were shown to be strongly related to perceptions of AI in this study. For example, AI minimizes errors in practice and is significantly associated with CPs with bachelor’s degrees in pharmacy when compared to other qualifications ( $p=$ 0.004). Similarly, CPs with bachelor’s in pharmacy were more likely to believe that AI enhances healthcare professionals’ access to information ( $p$ 0.001) and that AI enables healthcare professionals to make more correct decisions ( $p$ 0.001). There are presently no studies evaluating the relationship between CPs’ perceptions of AI and their attributes (education). Some research has been conducted to assess healthcare students’ and professionals’ perceptions of AI, but those early studies did not examine the relationship between perception and education [16, 17, 18]. The fact that CPs with bachelor’s in pharmacy consistently choose their profession as a pharmacist [24] and make the majority of the contribution in the current study, as in previous studies, may have contributed to the significant difference in perceptions of AI among CPs with other qualifications.

There are some limitations to this study. For example, the study was limited to the central region of Saudi Arabia, therefore the findings cannot be applied to the entire Saudi pharmacy workforce working in Saudi Arabia or other countries. The data were obtained utilizing a web-based electronic tool rather than physical or paper-based surveys, which may have resulted in a selection bias that influenced our findings. Third, the nature of the small sample size despite all efforts to include as many CPs as possible. Despite these limitations, our study has some merits. For example, this is the first study in Saudi Arabia among CPs to assess AI awareness and perception. Second, this study analyzes the importance of AI awareness in improving AI use in health care. In addition, there is a dearth of such research in this field, particularly among CPs in this area in Saudi Arabia and other countries. Furthermore, future studies should investigate by involving the entire pharmacist workforce to improve the generalizability of the results.

5. Conclusion

This study concluded that most of the CPs were aware of AI and agreed that AI is a tool that helps healthcare professionals. In addition, the majority of the CPs thought that AI adoption in healthcare practice will benefit healthcare practitioners. Furthermore, most of the CPs were found to have positive perceptions about AI and its applications in healthcare and were willing to practically adopt it. CPs also suggested that various AI courses be included in the pharmaceutical curriculum. As a result, it is advised that greater education on AI and its application in health care delivery be provided. Policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers should collaborate to introduce AI and its uses. More actions are needed to improve the present dispensing procedures at community pharmacies around the country. Additional research is required to discover more about people’s thoughts and perspectives on the importance of AI in the present world.

Footnotes

Conflict of interest

None to report.

Funding

The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project (number RSP2024R378) of King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia for financially supporting this work.

References

Abuzaid

Elshami

Tekin

Issa

. Assessment of the willingness of radiologists and radiographers to accept the integration of artificial intelligence into radiology practice. Academic Radiology. 2022 Jan 1; 29(1): 87-94.

Civaner

Uncu

Bulut

Chalil

Tatli

. Artificial intelligence in medical education: a cross-sectional needs assessment. BMC Medical Education. 2022 Nov 9; 22(1): 772.

Wang

Preininger

. AI in health: state of the art, challenges, and future directions. Yearbook of medical informatics. 2019 Aug; 28(1): 016-26.

Al-Arifi

. Community pharmacist perception and attitude toward ethical issues at community pharmacy setting in central Saudi Arabia. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. 2014 Sep 1; 22(4): 315-25.

Syed

Samarkandi

Alsadoun

Harbi

Al-Rawi

. Evaluation of clinical knowledge and perceptions about the development of thyroid cancer – an observational study of healthcare undergraduates in Saudi Arabia. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022 Aug 15; 10: 912424.

Raza

Aziz

Noreen

Saeed

Anjum

Ahmed

Raza

. Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Pharmacy: An Overview of Innovations. INNOVATIONS in pharmacy. 2022; 13(2).

Tyler

Jacobs

. Artificial intelligence in decision support systems for type 1 diabetes. Sensors. 2020 Jun 5; 20(11): 3214.

Amarasingham

Plantinga

Diener-West

Gaskin

Powe

. Clinical information technologies and inpatient outcomes: a multiple hospital study. Archives of internal medicine. 2009 Jan 26; 169(2): 108-14.

Dubin

Rubinsky

. A digital modality decision program for patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. JMIR formative research. 2019 Feb 6; 3(1): e12528.

10.

Curtain

Peterson

. Review of computerized clinical decision support in community pharmacy. Journal of clinical pharmacy and Therapeutics. 2014 Aug; 39(4): 343-8.

11.

Momattin

Arafa

Momattin

Rahal

Waterson

. Robotic pharmacy implementation and outcomes in Saudi Arabia: a 21-month usability study. JMIR Human Factors. 2021 Sep 1; 8(3): e28381.

12.

Saudi Arabia opens first smart pharmacy run by a robot. available at https://stepfeedcom/saudi-arabia-opens-first-smart-pharmacy-run-by-a-robot-7243#:∼:text=On%20Thursday%2C%20King%20Fahd%20Specialist,packages%20of%20medicine%20per%20hour.Last. accessed on March 12, 2023.

13.

Oliva

Altamura

Nurchis

Zedda

Sessa

Cazzato

Aulino

Sapienza

Riccardi

Della Morte

Caputo

. Assessing the potentiality of algorithms and artificial intelligence adoption to disrupt patient primary care with a safer and faster medication management: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open. 2022 May 1; 12(5): e057399.

14.

Rashidi

Vaniea

Camp

. Understanding Saudis’ privacy concerns when using WhatsApp. InProceedings of the Workshop on Usable Security (USEC’16) 2016 Feb 16 (pp. 1-8).

15.

Jha

Shankar

Al-Betar

Mukhia

Hada

Palaian

. Undergraduate medical Students’ and Interns’ knowledge and perception of artificial intelligence in medicine. Advances in Medical Education and Practice. 2022 Dec 31: 927-37.

16.

Abdullah

Fakieh

. Health care employees’ perceptions of the use of artificial intelligence applications: survey study. Journal of medical Internet research. 2020 May 14; 22(5): e17620.

17.

Ahmed

Bhinder

Tariq

Tahir

Mehmood

Tabassum

Malik

Aslam

Asghar

Yousaf

. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of artificial intelligence among doctors and medical students in Pakistan: A cross-sectional online survey. Annals of Medicine and Surgery. 2022 Apr 1; 76: 103493.

18.

Swed

Alibrahim

Elkalagi

Nasif

Rais

Nashwan

Aljabali

Elsayed

Sawaf

Albuni

Battikh

. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of artificial intelligence among doctors and medical students in Syria: a cross-sectional online survey. Frontiers in artificial intelligence. 2022 Sep 29; 5: 1011524.

19.

Fritsch

Blankenheim

Wahl

Hetfeld

Maassen

Deffge

Kunze

Rossaint

Riedel

Marx

Bickenbach

. Attitudes and perception of artificial intelligence in healthcare: A cross-sectional survey among patients. Digital health. 2022 Aug; 8: 20552076221116772.

20.

Badnjević

Avdihodžić

Gurbeta Pokvić

. Artificial intelligence in medical devices: Past, present and future. Psychiatria Danubina. 2021 May 19; 33(suppl 3): 101-6.

21.

Šećkanović

Šehovac

Spahić

Ramić

Mamatnazarova

Pokvić

Badnjević

Kacila

. Review of artificial intelligence application in cardiology. In 2020 9th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO) 2020 Jun 8 (pp. 1-5). IEEE.

22.

Hafizović

Čaušević

Deumić

Bećirović

Pokvić

Badnjević

. The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Diagnostic Medical Imaging: Systematic Literature Review. In 2021 IEEE 21st International Conference on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE) 2021 Oct 25 (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

23.

Mujkić

Baralić

Ombašić

Bećirović

Pokvić

Badnjević

. Machine Intelligence in Biomedical Data Modeling, Processing, and Analysis. In 2022 11th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO) 2022 Jun 7 (pp. 1-10). IEEE.

24.

Alrabiah

Syed

Babelghaith

Al Arifi

. Clinical Knowledge, Attitude, and Perceptions of Community Pharmacists Towards Pharmacogenomics-A Cross-Sectional Study from Saudi Arabia. Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine. 2023 Dec 31: 433-41.

Community pharmacists awareness,perceptions,and opinions of artificial intelligence: A cross-sectional study in Riyadh,Saudi Arabia

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

OBJECTIVE

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSION:

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Material and methods

2.1 Design, setting, and population

2.3 Study tool and data collection

2.4 Data analysis

3. Results

Table 1 Demographics characters of the CPs

5. Conclusion

Footnotes

Conflict of interest

Funding

References

Table 1
Demographics characters of the CPs