Entrustment and EPAs for Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Framework to Safeguard the Use of AI in Health Professions Education.

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-14 DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000005930
Brian C Gin, Patricia S O'Sullivan, Karen E Hauer, Raja-Elie Abdulnour, Madelynn Mackenzie, Olle Ten Cate, Christy K Boscardin
{"title":"Entrustment and EPAs for Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Framework to Safeguard the Use of AI in Health Professions Education.","authors":"Brian C Gin, Patricia S O'Sullivan, Karen E Hauer, Raja-Elie Abdulnour, Madelynn Mackenzie, Olle Ten Cate, Christy K Boscardin","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000005930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>In this article, the authors propose a repurposing of the concept of entrustment to help guide the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in health professions education (HPE). Entrustment can help identify and mitigate the risks of incorporating generative AI tools with limited transparency about their accuracy, source material, and disclosure of bias into HPE practice. With AI's growing role in education-related activities, like automated medical school application screening and feedback quality and content appraisal, there is a critical need for a trust-based approach to ensure these technologies are beneficial and safe. Drawing parallels with HPE's entrustment concept, which assesses a trainee's readiness to perform clinical tasks-or entrustable professional activities-the authors propose assessing the trustworthiness of AI tools to perform an HPE-related task across 3 characteristics: ability (competence to perform tasks accurately), integrity (transparency and honesty), and benevolence (alignment with ethical principles). The authors draw on existing theories of entrustment decision-making to envision a structured way to decide on AI's role and level of engagement in HPE-related tasks, including proposing an AI-specific entrustment scale. Identifying tasks that AI could be entrusted with provides a focus around which considerations of trustworthiness and entrustment decision-making may be synthesized, making explicit the risks associated with AI use and identifying strategies to mitigate these risks. Responsible, trustworthy, and ethical use of AI requires health professions educators to develop safeguards for using it in teaching, learning, and practice-guardrails that can be operationalized via applying the entrustment concept to AI. Without such safeguards, HPE practice stands to be shaped by the oncoming wave of AI innovations tied to commercial motivations, rather than modeled after HPE principles-principles rooted in the trust and transparency that are built together with trainees and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":"100 3","pages":"264-272"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005930","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: In this article, the authors propose a repurposing of the concept of entrustment to help guide the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in health professions education (HPE). Entrustment can help identify and mitigate the risks of incorporating generative AI tools with limited transparency about their accuracy, source material, and disclosure of bias into HPE practice. With AI's growing role in education-related activities, like automated medical school application screening and feedback quality and content appraisal, there is a critical need for a trust-based approach to ensure these technologies are beneficial and safe. Drawing parallels with HPE's entrustment concept, which assesses a trainee's readiness to perform clinical tasks-or entrustable professional activities-the authors propose assessing the trustworthiness of AI tools to perform an HPE-related task across 3 characteristics: ability (competence to perform tasks accurately), integrity (transparency and honesty), and benevolence (alignment with ethical principles). The authors draw on existing theories of entrustment decision-making to envision a structured way to decide on AI's role and level of engagement in HPE-related tasks, including proposing an AI-specific entrustment scale. Identifying tasks that AI could be entrusted with provides a focus around which considerations of trustworthiness and entrustment decision-making may be synthesized, making explicit the risks associated with AI use and identifying strategies to mitigate these risks. Responsible, trustworthy, and ethical use of AI requires health professions educators to develop safeguards for using it in teaching, learning, and practice-guardrails that can be operationalized via applying the entrustment concept to AI. Without such safeguards, HPE practice stands to be shaped by the oncoming wave of AI innovations tied to commercial motivations, rather than modeled after HPE principles-principles rooted in the trust and transparency that are built together with trainees and patients.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
×
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