What it measures

The AI Readiness and Disposition Survey for Health Professionals looks at the conditions that shape whether a person is ready to develop AI literacy, rather than at AI literacy itself. It covers:

• attitudes toward AI: interest, perceived value, sense of autonomy, and anxiety or pressure
• confidence in specific AI use situations
• perceived barriers to AI adoption
• perceptions of organizational support

It is intended for health professionals in clinical, educational, administrative and research roles. It is self-administered online and takes about 10 to 15 minutes. It draws on established AI readiness and technology acceptance instruments.

Where it sits in ALiF

Its classification is Complementary / Self-report / Individual. Complementary means it measures things that predict, enable or accompany ALiF competency development without operationalizing the ALiF components. A few confidence items touch on parts of technical understanding, evaluation and ethics, but none covers practical application or data literacy. It cannot replace the ALiF-SAQ as a measure of competence.

How it is used with ALiF

It is recommended as a pre-program diagnostic, paired with the ALiF-SAQ. Read together, the two help explain a low competency profile: low SAQ scores with high readiness point to a capability gap that training can close, while low scores with low readiness point to motivational or structural barriers that training alone will not resolve. It is suggested as a pre-screen for the AI Launchpad and FAIM, to flag learners who may benefit from readiness support first. A secondary use is measuring readiness to apply learning after a program.

What Referenced status means

ALiF has three endorsement tiers: Core, Endorsed and Referenced. ALiF Referenced is the entry tier. It rests on self-declared alignment with at least one ALiF component, recorded in a Quick Registry form that the core team checks for completeness only. No formal review of alignment or quality has taken place, so Referenced status is a registration, not an endorsement.

To move to ALiF Endorsed, an instrument needs expert content validity evidence, pilot data from at least 30 respondents and a full registry entry. The ALiF roadmap uses this survey as a first test case for the registry and endorsement model.

Status and limitations

The survey is in use, but formal psychometric validation has not started. No content validity study has been completed, its factor structure is unconfirmed, and the link between readiness scores and later SAQ results has not been established. Its items were written mainly for health care settings, so use in higher education needs checking. A content validity review and a study linking pre-program readiness to post-program SAQ profiles are planned.