ArticleBMC health services research2026
Navigating the AI era in dietetics: a qualitative analysis of professional identity, ethical concerns, and future projections in Türkiye.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs artificial intelligence (AI) technologies become increasingly integrated into healthcare systems, understanding their impact on healthcare professionals is essential. This study provides a comprehensive examination of dietitians' perspectives, experiences, and future projections regarding AI in Türkiye. The research elucidates how artificial intelligence may affect professional identity, patient-dietitian interactions, and ethical boundaries, drawing on direct insights from practitioners.
methodsThis qualitative research was conducted with 16 dietitians working in different institutions (hospitals, universities, and counselling centres) in Türkiye, selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected via a semi-structured interview (face-to-face/online) and analysed using inductive thematic analysis.
resultsThe analysis indicates that dietitians' perspectives on artificial intelligence are influenced by both perceived opportunities and risks. Participants described artificial intelligence as a valuable assistant that enhances information retrieval and efficiency yet expressed concerns regarding misinformation and the erosion of professional boundaries. A prevailing view among participants is that artificial intelligence can perform technical calculations but cannot replicate essential human attributes in dietetics, such as empathy, emotional connection, and personalized care. Furthermore, participants highlighted that information pollution generated by artificial intelligence may undermine client trust, with data privacy identified as the most significant ethical concern.
conclusionsDietitians maintain a cautious yet optimistic perspective regarding artificial intelligence technologies. Participants generally do not view technology as a competitor that will replace dietitians, but rather as a complementary tool that supports guidance and coaching beyond information provision. To maximize the benefits of artificial intelligence and mitigate associated risks, revising educational curricula to include digital literacy and promptly establishing professional ethical standards are essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.