Are physicians ready to embrace digital twins?

Physicians appear interested in digital twins, but readiness is better described as cautious openness than widespread clinical adoption. An M3 Global Research poll of 2,581 physicians reported 59% were somewhat or very likely to adopt within five years; 22% were neutral and 3% not at all likely. Interest was conditional on evidence and practical access.

Familiarity remains limited:
a Sermo poll reported 54% of physician respondents had no experience with digital twins, while another 18% knew the term but not how the technology worked. Many were unsure where it would be useful.

Clinicians’ main conditions for adoption are proof that simulations are accurate and reliable, validation in real-world practice, privacy safeguards, and human oversight. In the Sermo poll, 30% cited simulation accuracy/reliability and 24% real-world validation as key concerns; 45% wanted to see the technology used in practice first.

Implementation hurdles include fragmented health data, poor interoperability, workflow disruption, cost, limited training, unclear accountability, and uncertainty about regulation. Researchers and clinicians also stress that models should communicate their limitations and uncertainty transparently.

Bottom line:
physicians are not broadly ready to rely on digital twins for routine decisions today, but many are willing to explore them. Adoption is most likely to start in specific, well-validated uses—such as planning complex procedures or supporting treatment decisions—with clinicians retaining control.