Decoding medical educators' perceptions on generative artificial intelligence in medical education.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Journal of Investigative Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-07 DOI:10.1177/10815589241257215
Jorge Cervantes, Blake Smith, Tanya Ramadoss, Vanessa D'Amario, Mohammadali M Shoja, Vijay Rajput
{"title":"Decoding medical educators' perceptions on generative artificial intelligence in medical education.","authors":"Jorge Cervantes, Blake Smith, Tanya Ramadoss, Vanessa D'Amario, Mohammadali M Shoja, Vijay Rajput","doi":"10.1177/10815589241257215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Generative AI (GenAI) is a disruptive technology likely to generate a major impact on faculty and learners in medical education. This work aims to measure the perception of GenAI among medical educators and to gain insights into its major advantages and concerns in medical education. A survey invitation was distributed to medical education faculty of colleges of allopathic and osteopathic medicine within a single university during the fall of 2023. The survey comprised 12 items, among those assessing the role of GenAI for students and educators, the need to modify teaching approaches, GenAI's perceived advantages, applications of GenAI in the educational context, and the concerns, challenges, and trustworthiness associated with GenAI. Responses were obtained from 48 faculty. They showed a positive attitude toward GenAI and disagreed on GenAI having a very negative effect on either the students' or faculty's educational experience. Eighty-five percent of our medical schools' faculty responded to had heard about GenAI, while 42% had not used it at all. Generating text (33%), automating repetitive tasks (19%), and creating multimedia content (17%) were some of the common utilizations of GenAI by school faculty. The majority agreed that GenAI is likely to change its role as an educator. A perceived advantage of GenAI in conducting more effective background research was reported by 54% of faculty. The greatest perceived strengths of GenAI were the ability to conduct more efficient research, task automation, and increased content accessibility. The faculty's major concerns were cheating in home assignments in assessment (97%), tendency for blunder and false information (95%), lack of context (86%), and removal of human interaction in important feedback processes (83%). The majority of the faculty agrees on the lack of guidelines for safe use of GenAI from both a governmental and an institutional policy. The main perceived challenges were cheating, the tendency of GenAI to make errors, and privacy concerns.The faculty recognized the potential impact of GenAI in medical education. Careful deliberation of the pros and cons of GenAI is needed for its effective integration into medical education. There is general agreement that plagiarism and lack of regulations are two major areas of concern. Consensus-based guidelines at the institutional and/or national level need to start to be implemented to govern the appropriate use of GenAI while maintaining ethics and transparency. Faculty responses reflect an optimistic and favorable outlook on GenAI's impact on student learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":16112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"633-639"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investigative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10815589241257215","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Generative AI (GenAI) is a disruptive technology likely to generate a major impact on faculty and learners in medical education. This work aims to measure the perception of GenAI among medical educators and to gain insights into its major advantages and concerns in medical education. A survey invitation was distributed to medical education faculty of colleges of allopathic and osteopathic medicine within a single university during the fall of 2023. The survey comprised 12 items, among those assessing the role of GenAI for students and educators, the need to modify teaching approaches, GenAI's perceived advantages, applications of GenAI in the educational context, and the concerns, challenges, and trustworthiness associated with GenAI. Responses were obtained from 48 faculty. They showed a positive attitude toward GenAI and disagreed on GenAI having a very negative effect on either the students' or faculty's educational experience. Eighty-five percent of our medical schools' faculty responded to had heard about GenAI, while 42% had not used it at all. Generating text (33%), automating repetitive tasks (19%), and creating multimedia content (17%) were some of the common utilizations of GenAI by school faculty. The majority agreed that GenAI is likely to change its role as an educator. A perceived advantage of GenAI in conducting more effective background research was reported by 54% of faculty. The greatest perceived strengths of GenAI were the ability to conduct more efficient research, task automation, and increased content accessibility. The faculty's major concerns were cheating in home assignments in assessment (97%), tendency for blunder and false information (95%), lack of context (86%), and removal of human interaction in important feedback processes (83%). The majority of the faculty agrees on the lack of guidelines for safe use of GenAI from both a governmental and an institutional policy. The main perceived challenges were cheating, the tendency of GenAI to make errors, and privacy concerns.The faculty recognized the potential impact of GenAI in medical education. Careful deliberation of the pros and cons of GenAI is needed for its effective integration into medical education. There is general agreement that plagiarism and lack of regulations are two major areas of concern. Consensus-based guidelines at the institutional and/or national level need to start to be implemented to govern the appropriate use of GenAI while maintaining ethics and transparency. Faculty responses reflect an optimistic and favorable outlook on GenAI's impact on student learning.

EXPRESS:解码医学教育者对医学教育中生成式人工智能的看法。
生成式人工智能(GenAI)是一项颠覆性技术,可能会对医学教育中的教师和学习者产生重大影响。这项工作旨在衡量医学教育工作者对 GenAI 的看法,并深入了解其主要优势和顾虑。调查包括 12 个项目,评估 GenAI 对学生和教育工作者的作用。答复显示,他们对 GenAI 持积极态度,不同意 GenAI 对学生或教师的教育体验产生非常负面的影响。85%的受访者表示听说过 GenAI,42%的受访者表示完全没有使用过 GenAI。生成文本(33%)、自动执行重复性任务(19%)和创建多媒体内容(17%)是学校教师对 GenAI 的一些常见应用。大多数人认为,GenAI 有可能改变他们作为教育者的角色。他们认为,GenAI 的最大优势在于能够更有效地开展研究、实现任务自动化以及提高内容的可访问性。教师们的主要担忧是家庭作业中的作弊(97%)、错误和虚假信息的倾向(95%)、缺乏背景(86%)、重要反馈过程中人际互动的缺失(83%),以及缺乏安全使用GenAI的指导方针。教职员工的答复反映出他们对 GenAI 对学习的影响持乐观和积极的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Investigative Medicine
Journal of Investigative Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Investigative Medicine (JIM) is the official publication of the American Federation for Medical Research. The journal is peer-reviewed and publishes high-quality original articles and reviews in the areas of basic, clinical, and translational medical research. JIM publishes on all topics and specialty areas that are critical to the conduct of the entire spectrum of biomedical research: from the translation of clinical observations at the bedside, to basic and animal research to clinical research and the implementation of innovative medical care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信