Provider burnout

As hype grows around artificial intelligence in healthcare, a seemingly paradoxical question is setting off faint warning bells in the minds of skeptics and proponents alike: Could AI tools meant to reduce clinician burden actually increase it?

It’s too soon to say, given the technology’s nascency. But the answer — which has big implications for the future adoption of AI in the industry — depends in part on how intensely clinicians have to fact-check models, along with financial incentives in healthcare’s majority fee-for-service payment infrastructure, according to experts.

All told, AI products could add up to weaker time savings than developers promise, and any time saved could quickly be filled up by additional patient visits as hospitals and medical groups hustle to increase earnings.

“That’s absolutely a worry,” said Graham Walker, the co-director for advanced development at Kaiser Permanente’s medical group, during a panel at the HIMSS healthcare conference in Las Vegas. “The easiest way to get more revenue out of your healthcare system is by telling the doctors and [nurse practitioners] and pharmacists to go faster and see maybe just one more patient.”

‘The tools aren’t perfect’

The goal of many AI tools in healthcare is to reduce administrative friction by helping with rote tasks like documenting patient visits, looking up medical information or filing paperwork. Such tasks contribute to clinician burnout, which is a major problem in the industry and can lead physicians to exit the field.

About one-third of doctors responding to an American Medical Association survey in 2023 said they were interested in or planning to leave their jobs in the next few years. Many cited work overload as the reason: According to some research, healthcare workers spend the majority of their week working on administrative tasks.

Enter AI. Algorithms have been in use by healthcare companies for decades, but excitement around the tech has reached a fever pitch in the past few years with advancements like generative AI, which can create original text, and AI agents, which can perform tasks without human oversight.

A number of companies are folding the technology into sleekly-packaged products, touting time-saving metrics that may almost seem too good to be true to clinicians sick of after-hours ‘pajama time’ spent on documentation.

Abridge, a startup that uses ambient listening and generative AI to automate clinical notetaking, and Nabla, another ambient AI assistant, both claim to save providers about two hours each day.

Software giant Oracle has woven AI into its health records platform for providers, including a clinical AI assistant. Physicians using that tool see a 30% decrease in documentation time, according to the company.

Meanwhile, Microsoft says its AI documentation product saves doctors five minutes on average per patient visit.

“The capabilities that AI scribes bring to the practice of care are remarkable,” said Rohit Chandra, the chief digital officer at the Cleveland Clinic, during a panel. (The academic medical system is currently rolling out an AI documentation software from Ambience across its provider network.)

Documentation products tackle an acute pain point for doctors, while being relatively simple to use, easy to implement and safe, because they’re supervised by clinicians, Chandra said.

However, AI performance metrics such as time saved should be taken with a grain of salt, according to experts.

Clinicians still need to review the AI’s output to catch mistakes. That process, known as ‘human in the loop’, is key to ensure accuracy and build trust in AI, experts say.

Letting AI tools operate unsupervised could result in medical records containing made-up symptoms, or missing information that could be key to a patient’s health.

“That’s where I think we can get into trouble. The technology is going to get to the point where, at least in my opinion, I don’t think we’re going to need to worry as much. But as we think about early adoption, we do have to be cognizant that it is going to make mistakes,” Brenton Hill, head of operations at health AI standards group the Coalition of Health AI, said during a panel.

But deputizing clinicians to police what AI generates can cut significantly into time savings or, in some cases, erase them altogether.

“The tools aren’t perfect,” said Deborah Edberg, a family medicine physician with CVS-owned primary care chain Oak Street Health, during a panel. “We use AI to do our documentation and I do spend quite a bit of time going back and editing ... It can be a bit of a burden to make sure that what is recorded is accurate.”

To date, there have been no extensive, independent reviews of AI scribes in healthcare. But one recent study published in JAMA Network Open found Microsoft’s ambient scribe received mixed feedback from users.

“A recurring theme was the need for substantial editing and proofreading of the AI-generated notes, which sometimes offset the time saved,” the researchers wrote.

Time savings may not reach clinicians

Fee-for-service incentives could also prove a problem. The payment structure, which underpins the majority of healthcare spending in the U.S., rewards providers based on the volume of visits, tests and procedures they perform.

Meanwhile, despite a recovery in operating margins since the COVID-19 pandemic, costs are continuing to rise for hospital operators.

As a result, hospitals and other physician owners are incentivized to stuff their clinicians’ schedules as tightly as possible, to bring in as much revenue as possible. Any time freed up for doctors by AI might be filled with another visit, experts say.

“It could happen. And some organizations want to do that. And from our perspective, that’s an organizational decision,” Rachel Wilkes, the corporate lead for generative AI initiatives at EHR vendor Meditech, said. “If they want to schedule more patients with time savings, they can do that.”

Things that improve the productivity of the healthcare system — like reducing patient no-shows — often result in a heavier visit load for physicians, said Seth Howard, executive vice president of research and development at Epic.

“The conversation between the health system and the doctors need to be, ‘What do we do with those time savings?’ Does it go back into helping the doctor have some flexibility during the day? ... Or for doctors to see more patients?” Howard said.

Vendors are aware that the draw of AI products for hospitals includes the potential to increase revenue. 

Along with saving five minutes per encounter, Microsoft’s ambient AI frees up “13 additional appointment slots per provider, per month,” according to marketing materials.

The need to bolster flagging finances is one reason hospitals are ravenous for the tools, experts say. Demand has been skyrocketing, with the CEO of one company using AI to automate provider workflows likening it to “a fairy tale.”

“Our ambient product went from zero appointments a year two years ago, to a couple hundred thousand last year, to on track for 10 million this year,” said Tanay Tandon, the CEO of Commure, during a panel. “That sort of expansion and usage of AI in healthcare is incredibly exciting. That’s no longer your nerdy technical doctors playing around with it in the corner. This is meaningful use.”

Experts say like with any other technology, there are pros and cons when it comes to AI scribes, assistants and similar tools. In addition, other metrics besides time saved are important to physicians, like reducing their mental load by simplifying tasks or improving their job satisfaction by allowing them to focus on clinical care.

And anecdotal feedback from clinicians has been great, according to tech giants, AI scribes and the EHR vendors weaving the tech into their workflows.

Epic, for example, doesn’t have an average figure for how much time its own ambient documentation tool saves. But according to Howard, “physicians say, very commonly, I could never go back to how I did documentation before.”

U.S. physicians say their workplaces are trying to hire more workers to help meet demand for services, but a lack of qualified talent is stymieing efforts.

In a survey of 1,001 physicians conducted by Medscape, 63% of respondents said there was a lack of qualified physicians available in their local job market, and 30% said application quality for open doctor roles had declined recently.

Many don’t see the situation improving: Nearly 6 in 10 respondents described themselves as “very unconfident” or “unconfident” that progress could be made on the physician labor shortage over the next decade.

The Medscape report is the latest analysis to underscore that, although the healthcare labor market has improved since the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers are still struggling to fill positions.

Nearly 70% of survey respondents said their workplace was actively attempting to hire doctors either full- or part-time. Hospitals and healthcare organizations were more likely to hire than office-based practices, which could be due to patients seeking out care at larger organizations, according to the report.

Most said their workplace sought to fill less than five roles. The relatively low number of open roles is somewhat “reassuring,” according to Maddi Davidson, principal and senior director of market access with Avalere Health, who was interviewed by Medscape for the report.

She said that fewer than five openings could be attributed to natural turnover. Six or more openings in smaller practices or 20-plus open roles at large care settings would signify a more systemic mismatch between labor supply and demand.

Still, surveyed physicians said it’s been vexing to fill the few open roles. Doctors blame a lack of young, qualified talent. Some anonymous respondents said medical school applications haven’t kept pace with need. Others alluded to problems with the quality of medical training, saying interactions with young doctors left them with reduced faith in residency programs. 

Davidson suggested that employers struggling to hire begin to place a higher premium on practical experience over what is on paper, like an applicant’s education level. Other studies have said increased utilization of immigrant workers through H1-B visas or new visa categories could expand the supply of qualified healthcare professionals.

Tackling the labor shortage is paramount to improving burnout. Four in 10 respondents told Medscape that labor shortages impact their day-to-day by forcing them to take on more patients or work more hours.

“Physician shortages become a compounding problem because they drive physician burnout and turnover, leading to even worse shortages,” Jeff Decker, president of the physician and leadership solutions division at AMN Healthcare, told Medscape. “At some point, you can stretch physicians and other providers only so far.”

Sponsored content

By Microsoft

Clinician burnout: a growing challenge

Healthcare professionals are facing increasing pressures from the demands of documentation, data retrieval and administrative tasks—responsibilities that often take time away from patient care and personal well-being. The impact is significant: studies reveal burnout rates of 35% among healthcare workers, 57% among primary care physicians and an astonishing 88% among radiologists. This widespread stress not only undermines clinical quality and staff retention, but it also erodes the patient experience, resulting in hurried appointments and a loss of genuine human connection.

The role of AI: transforming clinical workflows

In response to these challenges, leaders in healthcare technology are leveraging artificial intelligence to support clinicians in their daily work. Rather than replacing healthcare professionals, AI solutions are designed to work alongside them adapting to the unique needs of each role and driving improvements in job satisfaction, operational efficiency and clinical outcomes.

Addressing burdens across roles

• Physicians: Late-night documentation and cognitive overload contribute significantly to physician burnout. AI-enabled systems that capture patient interactions in real time and automate routine tasks can help reduce these burdens, allowing doctors to focus more on care and less on paperwork.
• Nurses: Nurses are often tethered to computers, navigating complex interfaces and performing repetitive clicks, which leads to stress and high turnover. Mobile and voice-driven technologies can help nurses reconnect with patients by simplifying documentation and reducing administrative strain.
• Radiologists: Rising imaging volumes and fragmented information sources make it difficult for radiologists to maintain deep focus and produce high-quality reports. Integrated AI tools streamline workflows, minimize unnecessary steps and help radiologists concentrate on precise readings.

Key capabilities of AI clinical assistants

Modern AI clinical assistants offer a range of capabilities that alleviate administrative pressure and enhance care delivery:

• Ambient listening: Captures natural, multilingual conversations during clinical encounters, transforming speech into accurate documentation and reducing manual notetaking.
• Contextual understanding: Interprets intent, medical terminology and care sequences to generate actionable outputs, such as draft notes and orders, that integrate directly into electronic health records.
• Information surfacing: Provides clinicians with instant access to trusted medical references and organizational content, streamlining decision-making and reducing the need to navigate multiple systems.
• Automation: Drafts referral letters, summaries, nurse notes and follow-up documentation in real time, while suggesting coding and capturing orders with minimal manual effort.

Role-specific impact

• Physicians: Can document by speaking naturally, instantly access patient context, automate coding and summaries and reduce after-hours charting.
• Nurses: Capture observations in real time, minimize click fatigue, access information quickly and draft concise summaries.
• Radiologists: Integrate reporting, produce high-quality impressions and increase productivity with multimodal AI support.

Driving adoption: change management for success

Successful adoption of AI in healthcare depends on engaging clinicians early, supporting internal champions and aligning organizational leaders around shared goals. Change led by peers is more credible and sustainable than top-down mandates, and leadership must treat AI as a strategic clinical resource, not just another technology rollout.

Trust, security and outcomes

The effectiveness of AI in healthcare is anchored in a foundation of security, responsible innovation and reliability. Role-based experiences, deep integration with electronic health records and healthcare-grade security ensure that AI tools can be trusted in high-stakes environments. Organizations report measurable benefits, including reduced administrative burden, improved clinician satisfaction, enhanced operational efficiency and stronger financial performance.

Conclusion: restoring the human element

Ultimately, the promise of AI in healthcare is about restoring humanity to care. By alleviating the administrative load, clinicians regain the time, clarity and presence needed to deliver exceptional patient experiences. When technology is built with healthcare professionals at the center, it can transform workflows, improve outcomes and bring the human connection back to medicine.

The Trump administration’s plan to dramatically overhaul the H-1B visa application process is sparking anxiety among healthcare providers, who say their access to critical international talent could be threatened.

The H-1B program allows U.S. employers to hire foreign workers in specialty fields, including in healthcare. Although President Donald Trump has made illegal immigration reform a priority during his second administration, experts told Healthcare Dive that the sudden changes to the decades-old program have sent healthcare providers scrambling to understand the impact to their workforces.

Under the program, the government allows employers to sponsor a fixed number of visas per year to fill critical positions. It’s typically been considered a win-win, allowing companies to innovate while not overwhelming the job market with foreign talent. Since 2004, Congress has capped the number of H-1B visas at 85,000.

In fiscal year 2024, healthcare received nearly 8,500 new foreign workers through the program, according to an analysis from the Washington Post. The visas have helped promote innovation in health IT and have been heralded by medical groups — including the American Hospital Association and American Medical Association — as a vital resource to helping address widespread workforce shortages. 

However, since September 2025, the administration has handed down a one-two punch, announcing changes that AMA President Dr. Bobby Mukkamala said risk “shutting off” the healthcare industry’s talent pipeline, especially in rural and underserved areas.

The president first issued an executive order hiking the administrative cost of applying to the H-1B program from between $2,000 to $5,000 to as much as $100,000 per new applicant. The government says it will offer “case-by-case” exemptions when hiring for certain roles serves the “national interest.” Such exemptions may include doctors, according to a report from Bloomberg.

Then, the administration said it would overhaul the visa’s lottery process. The lottery kicks off when demand for new visas exceeds the 85,000 annual cap set by Congress — something that’s happened every year for more than a decade. Previously, applicants were selected at random from the lottery. Under the new process, the government intends to weight applications to offer higher paid and more skilled foreign employees a better chance at entry.

Such a change would disadvantage applications from early career family physicians and international medical graduates, who are likely to earn less money upon applying for a visa, said a spokesperson for the American Academy of Family Physicians.

The spokesperson said international medical graduates make up more than 22% of active family physicians nationwide and are more likely to practice in rural areas, where labor shortages are most severe. The medical group worries that undercutting health systems’ ability to hire these workers could ultimately compromise care. 

“Nearly 21 million Americans live in areas of the U.S. where foreign-trained physicians account for at least half of all physicians,” a spokesperson for the American Academy of Family Physicians said.

Paying the heightened fees likely isn’t an option for most providers, said Chris Musillo, a Cincinnati-based attorney specializing in healthcare immigration.

“These are often nonprofit organizations. They don’t have that kind of money lying around,” Musillo said.

For now, Sarah Hawk, immigration and global mobility chair at law firm Barnes & Thornburg, said most of her clients are in a “holding pattern” on hiring and residency decisions as they wait for more information. She expects the H-1B visa changes will likely be litigated.

“With this administration, it’s shock, it’s chaos, and then they walk it back,” Hawk said. “And they’ll do the carve outs for certain industries and maybe litigation will also cause injunction... but I do think that this proclamation is telling U.S. employers that the government does not want the H-1B workers to take U.S. workers’ jobs. That’s their concern, and so they’re trying to make it as restrictive as possible.”

H-1B visas are crucial for hiring workers in healthcare because there aren’t enough domestic workers to fill positions, Musillo said. The industry has struggled to educate, recruit and retain workers for years, due to a shortage of educators, pervasive burnout and a mismatch between supply and demand as Baby Boomers age.

Watchdog groups have advocated for increased immigration to help stem healthcare workforce shortages, and as recently as this month, there’s been bipartisan support in Congress for policies that would leverage unused visas to bring international nurses and doctors to the country.

“No one credibly believes that there’s a single American nurse who wants a job who doesn’t have one,” Musillo said. “No U.S. worker is being hurt by this program. And still, it seems like the administration’s solution is to turn off the faucet to what has traditionally been a huge chunk of the American nursing workforce.”

More than half of healthcare workers are considering leaving their jobs within the next year, according to a survey by the Harris Poll. 

Healthcare workers said they’re eyeing an exit due to dissatisfaction at work, including high levels of burnout and feeling taken for granted by their employers.

Employers may be able to retain talent by investing in educational opportunities, according to the survey, which was commissioned by education services company Strategic Education. Over 60% of surveyed employees said they would be more likely to stay in a role if tuition support was provided, for example.

The Harris Poll, which surveyed 1,504 frontline healthcare employees and 304 employers between June 26 and July 21, 2025, comes as burnout remains pervasive across the industry. Demand for healthcare workers is outpacing supply in most areas, especially rural regions, making attrition a pressing problem for employers. 

The labor shortage could also worsen in the coming years as Americans age and require more care, experts at the Harris Poll said. The Health Resources and Services Administration, for example, predicts there will be a shortage of nearly 700,000 physicians, registered nurses and licensed practical nurses by 2037.

Surveyed employees say they feel largely underappreciated, driving some of the attrition.

Only 1 in 5 healthcare workers surveyed believed their employer is invested in their long-term career growth, for example. And less than a third of respondents reported feeling “very loyal” to their current employer.

Still, Jennifer Musil, global president of research at the Harris Poll, said in a statement that the survey’s findings offer some answers for employers hoping to retain talent.

Education benefits appear to be an attractive perk for some, according to the survey. A majority of workers believe that employers should be investing more in their education, with Gen Z and Millennial workers most likely to say education benefits would be a reason to stay at their jobs.

Offering AI training would be a particularly popular offering, according to the survey, as both employers and employees say AI literacy is an increasingly valuable skill to have.

“Investment in the advancement of employees is central to ensuring that the healthcare workforce feels appreciated and valued, while also prepared to meet new challenges, including AI,” said Adele Webb, executive dean of healthcare initiatives at Strategic Education.

Artificial intelligence-backed notetaking assistants are likely reducing clinician burnout, but the tools’ financial impact for health systems is still unclear, according to an analysis by the Peterson Health Technology Institute. 

Early adopters of the scribes, which typically record providers’ conversations with patients and draft a clinical note, report they appear to lessen burnout and cognitive load associated with documentation. The tools could also improve patient experience by ensuring clinicians don’t have to focus on taking notes during an appointment.

But there’s still limited evidence on the scribes’ effect on productivity and financial performance, according to the PHTI report. Still, health systems said savings could arise as the technology and implementation process improve.

About 60 AI scribes are currently being rolled out in the healthcare sector, according to the PHTI analysis. The field is crowded, with tech giants like Microsoft and Oracle offering their own tools alongside startups including Abridge, Nabla and Suki. 

Adoption of the documentation tools has been uncharacteristically fast for the industry, which is often beset with long sales cycles and implementation plans, PHTI wrote in the report, which included interviews with health system leaders, technology companies and industry experts participating in its AI task force. 

The promise of the notetaking assistants is significant for health systems and clinicians. Providers have long struggled with a heavy workload of administrative tasks they say stretch into their personal time and impede patient care.

The “driving force” behind many health systems’ decisions to adopt AI documentation products is reducing clinician burnout — a major concern for organizations facing workforce shortages, according to the report. 

And the tools could be having an impact. In one example, Mass General Brigham, one participant in the AI task force, reported a 40% relative reduction in burnout during a six-week survey pilot. Providers at Washington-based MultiCare reported a 63% reduction in burnout and a 64% improvement in work-life balance.

“Ambient documentation has proven to be one of the most effective and impactful methods for enhancing the provider experience,” Adam Landman, chief information officer at Mass General Brigham, said in a statement.

Health system leaders said the scribes could improve care too, allowing physicians to focus their attention on the patient rather than a computer screen. One study by the Permanente Medical Group found that 81% of surveyed patients reported their physician spent less time looking at their computer when using an AI scribe. 

However, health systems aren’t seeing clear impact in financial metrics, like the number of patients that providers have time to see or the accuracy of billing codes. 

Currently, finances often aren’t the main reason for implementing a documentation tool, according to the report. Still, some health systems expect that clinics could eventually add more patients as they increase adoption of the AI scribes — but others argued increasing patient load could reverse the tools’ progress when it comes to burnout.

Among clinicians, actual uptake of the AI scribes varies. Use is typically divided into three groups: A cohort of clinicians who utilize them frequently, a group that uses the product for some visits and another cohort that rarely or never uses the documentation assistant, according to the analysis. 

Once a scribe is widely available, adoption rates are between 20% to 50%, according to the analysis. 

The pay gap between hospital executives and average employees is on the rise, even after a bump in some frontline workers’ wages during the early years of the COVID-19 pandemic, according to a study published in Health Affairs. 

Nonprofit hospital CEOs were paid 10.2 times the average wage of all hospital workers in 2009. That ratio increased nearly 18% to a 12-fold difference by 2023, researchers found. 

Overall, the average wage of hospital CEOs rose by 27.5% from 2009 to 2023, while the average pay for all employees rose 9.8%.

The average annual wage for CEOs rose from $813,657.60 in 2009 to $1,037,182.70 in 2023, according to the study, which evaluated pay at more than 1,400 nonprofit hospitals. 

Meanwhile, the average pay of employees increased from $76,837.30 to $84,370.50. 

Although CEO pay growth outpaced worker pay over the 14-year study period, the ratio decreased during the pandemic, falling nearly 8% in 2019 and 2020 before rebounding over the next three years.

During the pandemic, wages among nonphysician contract positions that provide direct patient care increased the most — possibly due to the surge in travel nursing in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, according to the study. Hospitals spent more to attract staff and contract labor during the pandemic as health systems struggled with heightened turnover and persistent employee burnout.

Teaching hospitals and urban facilities as well as larger chain hospitals were linked to higher CEO wages and larger discrepancies between CEO and worker pay in 2023.

However, nonteaching, nonurban, smaller and nonchain hospitals saw the largest percentage increases in executive pay compared with the prepandemic period, possibly because baseline pay at teaching, urban, large and chain hospitals was already elevated — making absolute increases appear smaller in percentage terms, the study found. 

Wage inequality at nonprofit hospitals should be a significant concern, given the impact of low pay on these hospitals’ communities, researchers wrote. Nonprofits are exempt from most state and federal taxes, as these facilities have to provide care even when patients can’t afford services.

However, previous research has found charity care policies vary widely among nonprofit facilities, and the tax breaks received by hospitals may exceed the amount they spend on charity care or community investment. 

Meanwhile, hospitals are often major employers in their communities — so depressed pay could have a significant impact outside their walls, according to the Health Affairs analysis. 

“In light of nonprofit hospitals’ favorable tax status, measures of wage inequality may be considered in broader discussions of nonprofit hospitals’ contribution to their communities, including their effect on local economic inequality,” researchers wrote. 

Fewer physicians are considering leaving the profession in 2025 than in 2024, according to a survey from the Harris Poll and electronic health record provider Athenahealth.

Part of physicians’ improved job satisfaction was driven by increased adoption of artificial intelligence, the researchers said. Fewer physicians reported the technology was over-hyped, and they saw the most promise in transcription services and capabilities.

Still, physicians shared concerns about the fate of the industry long-term and only 3 in 10 physicians were optimistic about the direction of U.S. healthcare generally. Respondents were most concerned about interoperability challenges, their organization’s financial health and meeting regulatory requirements.

Athenahealth, an electronic health record vendor that sells patient engagement tools and healthcare AI products, and the Harris Poll surveyed more than a thousand primary care and specialist physicians nationwide in January to understand physician attitudes about the state of their profession and the adoption of emergent technologies.

The team reported a decrease in physician burnout rates and intentions to quit in 2025 relative to 2024 — a welcome finding after multiple years of high physician turnover following the COVID-19 pandemic.

In a blog post accompanying the survey, the team said technology improvements, especially the use of AI to address administrative burdens, was a “main driver” of physicians’ changing sentiments.

“For years EHRs were cited as one of the major contributors to physician burnout, so it stands to reason that as the technology improves, we’ll hopefully start to see sentiments improve as well,” the team said in the blog.

While previous independent research has linked frustrations with EHRs to turnover, those studies have cautioned against attributing discontent to a single factor. Researchers note burnout is complex and can stem from frustrations with pay, difficult patients, volume and intensity of work, and advancement opportunities.

In Athenahealth’s survey, 3 in 10 physicians said AI has the potential to reduce burnout. The same number reported they are currently using AI in their practice, while the majority have yet to adopt the technology. 2025 was the first time researchers queried physicians about their AI use, so a spokesperson couldn’t comment on whether AI adoption had ramped up among physicians.

The survey did find an increase in “resources and tools” available to physicians in 2025 relative to 2023. Physicians also reported spending more time with patients relative to 2023, which could partially explain the shift in burnout and quit intentions, according to the survey.

Fifty-one percent of physicians report having adequate time with patients, up from 43% in 2023. While 35% of respondents said patient volumes and costs negatively impact their ability to provide quality care at least once a week, that’s down from the 50% of respondents who said volumes and costs impacted care at least once a week in 2023.

Still, physicians report more optimism about potential use cases of AI. They said the greatest possible benefits to using AI in healthcare will be improved clinical documentation and transcription services, identifying patterns in patient data and reduced administrative burdens. 

However, there is a gender gap forming between male and female physicians in how comfortable they feel using the technology to treat patients. 

While 66% of male physicians would use AI for diagnosis support and 54% would use the technology for treatment planning, only 46% of female physicians would leverage the technology for diagnostics and just 36% would use it for treatment planning.

Across genders, physicians said their top concerns with using AI include the loss of a human touch in healthcare, an overreliance on the tools to diagnose patients and improper diagnoses.