Assessing Public Knowledge and Acceptance of Using Artificial Intelligence Doctors as a Partial Alternative to Human Doctors in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Objective To assess the public acceptance of using artificial intelligence (AI) doctors to diagnose and treat patients as a partial alternative to human physicians in Saudi Arabia. Methodology An observational cross-sectional study was conducted from January to March 2024. A link to an online questionnaire was distributed through social media applications to citizens and residents aged 18 years and older across various regions in Saudi Arabia. The sample size was calculated using the Raosoft online survey size calculator, which estimated that the minimum sample size should be 385. Results Of the 386 participants surveyed, 85.8% reported being aware of AI, and 47.9% reported having some knowledge about different AI fields in daily life. However, almost one-third (32.9%) reported a lack of knowledge about the use of AI in healthcare. In terms of acceptance, 52.3% of respondents indicated they felt comfortable with the use of AI tools as partial alternatives to human doctors, and 30.8% believed AI is useful in the field of health. The most common concern (63.7%) about the use of AI tools accessible to patients was the difficulty of describing symptoms using these tools. Conclusion The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the public's knowledge and acceptance of AI in medicine within the Saudi Arabian context. Overall, this study underscores the importance of proactively addressing the public's concerns and knowledge gaps regarding AI in healthcare. By fostering greater understanding and acceptance, healthcare stakeholders can better harness the potential of AI to improve patient outcomes and enhance the efficiency of medical services in Saudi Arabia.

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccinations on Menstrual Bleeding.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination has a fundamental role in protecting against and modifying the severity of several infectious diseases, including COVID-19. Several immune and non-immune adverse events have been reported post-COVID-19 vaccine. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the COVID-19 vaccine on women's menstrual bleeding. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 399 vaccinated women in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. Data were collected using a direct interview-based questionnaire including four sections. RESULTS: A total of 399 women were recruited, with a mean age of 25.54 ± 6.177 years. More than half (53.9%) of the participants reported post-vaccination menstrual bleeding abnormality in terms of a heavy or irregular cycle. Out of the total number, 40 (21.4%) women reported having heavy menstrual flow, and 67 (16.8%) had non-menstrual bleeding after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. Fully vaccinated women were at a greater risk of post-vaccination menstrual bleeding abnormality (p = 0.058). However, there was no correlation between booster shot type and menstrual bleeding abnormality (p > 0.05). In addition, there was no significant association between non-menstrual bleeding and the type of booster shot, the type of the first dose, and prior history of COVID-19 infection (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite vaccination being the most effective way to prevent COVID-19, it does have an impact on menstrual bleeding in terms of menorrhagia and metrorrhagia. Therefore, more studies are needed to understand the mechanism and the long-term impact of COVID-19 vaccines on the hemostatic system.