Ashwin Agrawal, Vineeta Guntupalli, Jonathan E Teitelbaum, Mohamed Elrais
{"title":"Assessing pediatric gastroenterologists' use of artificial intelligence in clinical and professional tasks.","authors":"Ashwin Agrawal, Vineeta Guntupalli, Jonathan E Teitelbaum, Mohamed Elrais","doi":"10.1002/jpr3.70202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Artificial intelligence (AI) has demonstrated potential to enhance clinical efficiency. However, its real-world adoption among pediatric gastroenterologists (GIs) remains poorly characterized. The primary objective of this study was to assess how pediatric GIs are currently utilizing AI. Secondary objectives included estimating time saved, identifying commonly used tools, and evaluating the impact on burnout.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An institutional review board-approved anonymous survey was distributed via the international pediatric gastroenterology listserv. The questionnaire assessed demographics, types of AI technologies utilized, and estimated time saved through their use. The survey was open from September 30, 2025, to October 28, 2025.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One-hundred and twenty-nine completed surveys were included in the analysis. Majority of respondents were from the United States (85.3%). AI was most frequently used for ambient AI scribes, dictation, answering clinical questions, preparing letters of medical necessity, and insurance appeals, with many reporting time savings with use of AI. In addition, 58.1% of respondents had utilized AI for some research-related purpose. AI utilization did not vary significantly across years of practice or practice type. Clinicians who utilized AI technology had higher frequency of self-reported reduced burnout. Few (28.7%) received training in AI, while the majority (84.4%) would like more education in the use of AI in practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The use of AI tools by pediatric GIs is variable. Those who adopted AI reported reduced burnout and increased time savings, reflecting a positive impact on efficiency and clinician well-being. Despite limited formal training, there was a strong interest in AI education and clinical integration.</p>","PeriodicalId":501015,"journal":{"name":"JPGN reports","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13398647/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JPGN reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jpr3.70202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) has demonstrated potential to enhance clinical efficiency. However, its real-world adoption among pediatric gastroenterologists (GIs) remains poorly characterized. The primary objective of this study was to assess how pediatric GIs are currently utilizing AI. Secondary objectives included estimating time saved, identifying commonly used tools, and evaluating the impact on burnout.
Methods: An institutional review board-approved anonymous survey was distributed via the international pediatric gastroenterology listserv. The questionnaire assessed demographics, types of AI technologies utilized, and estimated time saved through their use. The survey was open from September 30, 2025, to October 28, 2025.
Results: One-hundred and twenty-nine completed surveys were included in the analysis. Majority of respondents were from the United States (85.3%). AI was most frequently used for ambient AI scribes, dictation, answering clinical questions, preparing letters of medical necessity, and insurance appeals, with many reporting time savings with use of AI. In addition, 58.1% of respondents had utilized AI for some research-related purpose. AI utilization did not vary significantly across years of practice or practice type. Clinicians who utilized AI technology had higher frequency of self-reported reduced burnout. Few (28.7%) received training in AI, while the majority (84.4%) would like more education in the use of AI in practice.
Conclusions: The use of AI tools by pediatric GIs is variable. Those who adopted AI reported reduced burnout and increased time savings, reflecting a positive impact on efficiency and clinician well-being. Despite limited formal training, there was a strong interest in AI education and clinical integration.