Most people want to be told when AI is used in their care

What happened

The Pew Research Center published a survey on 25 August 2026 asking people how they feel about artificial intelligence being used in their healthcare. The answer was clear: they want to be told. The survey covered 3,488 adults in the United States and was carried out between 22 and 28 June 2026. Nearly three-quarters said it was extremely or very important that doctors and other health professionals tell patients when AI is being used in their care. Around four in five said patients should be told specifically when AI is used to read medical scans, help make a diagnosis, or explain laboratory results. Even for less dramatic uses, most people still wanted to know. That included AI taking notes during an appointment, ordering a repeat prescription from a pharmacy, or booking appointments. Then came the more uncomfortable findings. Fifty-three per cent said they felt they had little or no say over whether AI was used in their care. And nearly half were not sure whether AI had already been used in their care or not. So: strong agreement that people should be told, alongside a widespread sense that nobody is telling them.

Why this matters

This is a survey of Americans, not Britons, and that is worth saying plainly up front. American healthcare works very differently from the NHS. The numbers should not be read as a direct measurement of UK opinion. But the question behind it lands squarely here, because AI is arriving in the NHS at speed. In July 2026 NHS England announced an accelerated rollout of AI tools. That includes an AI triage feature in the NHS App, designed to steer people towards the right service, whether that is a GP appointment, a pharmacy, A&E or self-care advice. NHS England said the triage tool is expected to reach more than 200,000 patients within 12 months, and to be available to all NHS App users by April 2028. It also covers wider use of ambient voice technology, which listens to consultations and drafts the notes so clinicians can spend more time looking at the patient than the screen. An early trial at a GP practice in Sussex reported a 29% drop in the number of people queuing on the phone, while patient satisfaction stayed steady. That is a real benefit for anyone who has ever redialled at 8am. So the technology is coming, and some of it is genuinely useful. The Pew findings simply point at the thing that is easy to skip in the rush: telling people. Trust in healthcare is built slowly and lost quickly, and the fastest way to lose it is for someone to find out later that something was used on them without their knowledge.

What the evidence actually says

It is worth being careful about what this survey does and does not tell us. What it measures well is what people say they want. A sample of 3,488 adults is a decent size for a national survey, and Pew is a well-regarded, non-partisan research organisation. The finding that people want disclosure is consistent and strong across different uses of AI. What it does not measure is behaviour. Wanting to be told and actually reading the notice you are given are different things. Anyone who has clicked "accept" on a website without reading a word knows this. So a rule requiring disclosure is a floor, not a solution. It also does not tell us whether AI is helping or harming patients. That is a separate question, answered by clinical evidence rather than opinion polls. Some AI tools in healthcare have strong evidence behind them. Others have very little. A patient's preference for transparency is not a verdict on whether any particular tool works. And the survey is American. Attitudes to health data in a system where you are a paying customer of a private insurer may differ from attitudes in a system funded through taxes and generally trusted. It could cut either way. One finding does travel well, though, because it is about knowledge rather than culture: nearly half of respondents did not know whether AI had already been involved in their care. That is not an opinion. That is a gap in information, and the same gap almost certainly exists here.

Qurexa perspective

We should be straight with you about our own position, since it would be odd to write about disclosure and then say nothing about ourselves. Qurexa is a healthcare logistics company. We deliver prescriptions and support people with medication adherence. Like most modern businesses we use software to plan delivery routes and manage orders. What we do not do is make clinical decisions about you. Decisions about your medicines are made by your prescriber and your pharmacist, who are qualified and regulated to make them. We think that distinction is the useful one for patients to hold onto. The question worth asking is not simply "is a computer involved?", because computers have been involved in healthcare for decades. The better question is: "who is accountable for this decision, and can I speak to them?" If you ever want to know how your information is handled by us, ask. You are entitled to a straight answer, and "it's complicated" is not one. The same applies to your NHS care. Asking your GP practice or pharmacy whether an AI tool was involved is a completely reasonable question, and a good service will answer it without fuss.

Practical advice

You are allowed to ask. If you are curious whether AI was used in reading your scan, drafting your notes or triaging your request, ask the person in front of you. It is not a rude question. A useful phrasing is: "Did anything automated help with this, and who checked it?" That gets at the part that matters, which is human oversight. If you use the NHS App and are offered an AI triage option, remember it is not the only route. NHS England has said patients can still contact their GP practice in the usual ways. An AI tool suggesting where to go is not a diagnosis. If your symptoms are severe or getting worse quickly, do not let an app talk you out of your own judgement. Call 999 for emergencies, or use NHS 111 if you are unsure. If you are asked to consent to something and do not understand it, say so and ask for it in plain English. That is on the service to provide, not on you to decipher. You can ask what happens to your data. In the UK you have rights over your personal information, including health information, and NHS organisations publish privacy notices explaining how they use it.

What to know

A Pew Research Center survey of 3,488 US adults, published on 25 August 2026, found that nearly three-quarters think it is important that healthcare providers disclose when AI is used in their care. Around four in five wanted to be told specifically about AI reading scans, helping with diagnosis, or explaining test results. At the same time, 53% felt they had little or no say in whether AI is used, and nearly half did not know whether it had already been used on them. The survey is American, so the numbers do not transfer directly to the UK. The underlying issue does. NHS England is accelerating AI across the health service, including an AI triage tool in the NHS App expected to reach over 200,000 patients within a year and all users by April 2028. Some of this technology is genuinely useful, and an early Sussex trial cut phone queues by 29% without reducing patient satisfaction. Being in favour of transparency does not mean being against the technology. The practical takeaway is small and worth remembering: you are allowed to ask whether AI was involved in your care, and who checked its work. Sources: Pew Research Center, "Americans want transparency when AI is used in their healthcare", 25 August 2026, https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/08/25/americans-want-transparency-when-ai-is-used-in-their-healthcare/; Healthcare Dive, "Most Americans want providers to disclose AI use: survey", https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/most-americans-want-providers-disclose-ai-use-survey-pew/828921/; NHS England, "NHS accelerates artificial intelligence rollout to cut waiting times and improve care for millions", 6 July 2026, https://www.england.nhs.uk/2026/07/nhs-accelerates-artificial-intelligence-rollout-to-cut-waiting-times-and-improve-care-for-millions/ This article is for general information and does not replace advice from a doctor, pharmacist or other qualified healthcare professional. If you have concerns about how decisions about your care were made, speak to your GP practice or the organisation providing your care.