Abstract Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) technology is increasingly supporting research writing, raising concerns about academic integrity, intellectual skill development, and ethics in academics and research. Methodology: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from February to May 2026 among 383 postgraduate students from four randomly selected health science institutions in Mangalore, Karnataka, to assess AI usage, determinants of utilization, and perceived outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, while Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine associations and identify factors associated with AI utilization. Results: Majority of respondents reported familiarity with ChatGPT (98.2%) and previous AI usage (68.7%). Age, program of study, research experience, and prior AI usage were statistically associated with AI utilization (all P < 0.05). AI application was mostly to paraphrase (62.8%), summarize (61.9%), and check grammar (57.4%). Major facilitators included perceived usefulness (mean [ M ] = 3.82, ±standard deviation: ±0.91) and ease-of-use ( M = 3.91 ± 0.83). Among the facilitators assessed, institutional norms (perceived institutional support and expectations regarding AI use) ( M = 3.01 ± 1.01) and confidence in AI output ( M = 2.98 ± 0.895) had the lowest mean scores. The highest-rated perceived benefit of AI use was improved time efficiency gained ( M = 3.95 ± 0.83), followed by enhanced academic performance ( M = 3.66 ± 0.84). Concern about plagiarism received the highest concern rating ( M = 3.99 ± 0.80). Regression analysis identified ethical awareness as the only statistically significant independent predictor of AI use (β = 0.100, P = 0.019). Conclusion: Postgraduate students widely adopt AI tools to support academic and research writing, particularly to improve writing efficiency. However, AI utilization appears to be influenced more by students’ ethical awareness than by conventional demographic or academic factors. Responsible and effective integration of AI into postgraduate education and research within health science institutions requires clear institutional AI in research guidelines that promote ethical, transparent, and accountable AI use.
Abstract Introduction: Materiovigilance (MV) refers to systematic monitoring and evaluation of medical devices (MD) in order to assess their performance and safety. The purpose of MV is to identify and prevent any potential hazards or issues related to MD. This study aims to assess the knowledge, attitude, and practice of MV among doctors in a tertiary care hospital. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional, observational and questionnaire-based study was conducted among 135 doctors working in various departments of our hospital. Doctors from different specialties who volunteered to participate in this study were enrolled. Results: A total of 135 doctors participated, and among them, the mean age was 38.7 ± 10.38 years. Out of which 70.8% of professors had wide knowledge, whereas associate professors (19.9%) had the least knowledge about MV. The overall attitude-based responses were positive among the associate professors, and 95.2% postgraduates felt that MV has to be taught to all healthcare professionals, and every hospital should have a mandatory MDAE reporting center. Most of the professors (54.5%) had experienced MD-related adverse events but lacked in reporting the same. 11.8% of the doctors alone had attended workshops related to MV. Conclusion: Despite doctors having adequate knowledge and a positive attitude toward MV, very poor reporting of MDAE is observed. Lack of knowledge on how and where to report an MDAE is a significant barrier leading to under-reporting; hence, more hands-on training workshops have to be conducted to prevent the knowledge gap.
Abstract Purpose: Social media is increasingly used for clinical trial recruitment, yet participant response to such recruitment remains inconsistent. This study examined the role of source credibility in shaping attitudes and behavioral intention to participate in clinical trials advertised through social media and assessed whether these relationships differ across regulatory environments. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among adults in the United States ( n = 298) and Germany ( n = 273). Source credibility, attitude, behavioral intention, perceived usefulness, and perceived ease of use were measured using previously validated scales adapted to the context of social media-based clinical trial recruitment. Structural equation modeling and multi-group analysis were performed. Results: Source credibility was the strongest predictor of attitude toward clinical trial advertising in both countries. In the United States, credibility also directly predicted behavioral intention and strengthened the relationship between attitude and participation intention. In Germany, credibility influenced attitude but showed no significant direct effect on behavioral intention. Perceived ease of use through perceived usefulness positively influenced attitudes in both countries. Conclusion: Source credibility plays a central role in shaping responses to social media-based clinical trial recruitment. Its influence varies across regulatory environments, suggesting that trust-building strategies should be tailored to local healthcare and regulatory contexts. The findings have implications for emerging markets, including India, where social media recruitment is expanding and where transparency, ethics committee oversight, and participant trust remain essential.
Abstract Introduction: This study evaluates the impact of a research education initiative aimed at enhancing patient and family engagement in cystic fibrosis (CF) clinical trials. The primary objective was to understand patient perspectives to support increased enrollment and improve trial selection by aligning studies with patients’ psychosocial considerations. Materials and Methods: This single-center cross-sectional survey study was conducted between May 2023 and April 2024. Adults with CF (AwCF) and parents/families of children with CF (PfCF) received 1 h of nurse-led research education during a clinic visit; knowledge and perspectives were then assessed via survey. Results: Of 153 participants, 74 were AwCF and 79 were PfCF. 37.3% were initially unaware of clinical research and opportunities. Despite 56.2% previously declining participation due to side effect concerns, the intervention led to 75% reporting improved understanding and 94.8% expressing future willingness to enroll. Key motivators included physician recommendations and the desire to contribute to new cures. Physician-led discussions significantly fostered patient empowerment and engagement. Conclusion: In advancing care for the chronic and rare disease of CF, this study supports a patient-centered clinical research model that prioritizes education, builds trust, and aligns trial design with the psychosocial needs, preferences, and lived experiences of the CF community.
