The impact of generative AI on health professional education: A systematic review in the context of student learning.

IF 5.2 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Thai Duong Pham, Nilushi Karunaratne, Betty Exintaris, Danny Liu, Travis Lay, Elizabeth Yuriev, Angelina Lim
{"title":"The impact of generative AI on health professional education: A systematic review in the context of student learning.","authors":"Thai Duong Pham, Nilushi Karunaratne, Betty Exintaris, Danny Liu, Travis Lay, Elizabeth Yuriev, Angelina Lim","doi":"10.1111/medu.15746","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly integrated into health professions education (HPE), offering new opportunities for student learning. However, current research lacks a comprehensive understanding of how HPE students actually use GenAI in practice. Laurillard's Conversational Framework outlines six learning types-acquisition, inquiry, practice, production, discussion and collaboration-commonly used to categorise learning activities supported by conventional and digital technologies. Gaining insight into how GenAI aligns with these six learning types could assist HPE academics in integrating it more thoughtfully and effectively into teaching and learning.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This systematic review investigates how HPE students utilise GenAI and examines how these uses align with Laurillard's six learning types compared to conventional and digital technologies.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A systematic review searching five major databases-ERIC, Education Database, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Scopus including articles on HPE students' use of GenAI until 15th September 2024. Studies were included if they were conducted within formal HPE training programs in HPE and specifically mentioned how students interact with GenAI. Data were mapped to the six learning modes of the Laurillard's Framework. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-three studies met inclusion criteria. GenAI supported learning most frequently in practice (73%), inquiry (70%), production (67%) and acquisition (55%). These studies highlight GenAI's varied educational applications, from clarifying complex concepts to simulating clinical scenarios and generating practice materials. Discussion and collaboration were less represented (12% each), suggesting a shift toward more individualised learning with GenAI. The findings highlight benefits such as efficiency and accessibility, alongside concerns about critical thinking, academic integrity and reduced peer interaction.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review has provided insights into HPE students' learning aligned with Laurillard's existing six learning types. Although GenAI supports personalised and self-directed learning, its role in collaborative modes is under-explored.</p>","PeriodicalId":18370,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15746","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly integrated into health professions education (HPE), offering new opportunities for student learning. However, current research lacks a comprehensive understanding of how HPE students actually use GenAI in practice. Laurillard's Conversational Framework outlines six learning types-acquisition, inquiry, practice, production, discussion and collaboration-commonly used to categorise learning activities supported by conventional and digital technologies. Gaining insight into how GenAI aligns with these six learning types could assist HPE academics in integrating it more thoughtfully and effectively into teaching and learning.

Purpose: This systematic review investigates how HPE students utilise GenAI and examines how these uses align with Laurillard's six learning types compared to conventional and digital technologies.

Material and methods: A systematic review searching five major databases-ERIC, Education Database, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Scopus including articles on HPE students' use of GenAI until 15th September 2024. Studies were included if they were conducted within formal HPE training programs in HPE and specifically mentioned how students interact with GenAI. Data were mapped to the six learning modes of the Laurillard's Framework. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).

Results: Thirty-three studies met inclusion criteria. GenAI supported learning most frequently in practice (73%), inquiry (70%), production (67%) and acquisition (55%). These studies highlight GenAI's varied educational applications, from clarifying complex concepts to simulating clinical scenarios and generating practice materials. Discussion and collaboration were less represented (12% each), suggesting a shift toward more individualised learning with GenAI. The findings highlight benefits such as efficiency and accessibility, alongside concerns about critical thinking, academic integrity and reduced peer interaction.

Conclusion: This review has provided insights into HPE students' learning aligned with Laurillard's existing six learning types. Although GenAI supports personalised and self-directed learning, its role in collaborative modes is under-explored.

生成性人工智能对卫生专业教育的影响:在学生学习背景下的系统回顾。
背景:生成式人工智能(GenAI)越来越多地融入卫生专业教育(HPE),为学生学习提供了新的机会。然而,目前的研究缺乏对HPE学生在实践中如何实际使用GenAI的全面理解。劳里拉德的对话框架概述了六种学习类型——习得、探究、实践、生产、讨论和合作——通常用于对传统和数字技术支持的学习活动进行分类。深入了解GenAI如何与这六种学习类型相结合,可以帮助HPE学者更周到、更有效地将其整合到教学中。目的:本系统综述调查了HPE学生如何利用GenAI,并研究了与传统和数字技术相比,这些使用如何与劳里拉德的六种学习类型相一致。材料和方法:系统检索了五个主要数据库——eric, Education Database, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase和Scopus,包括截至2024年9月15日HPE学生使用GenAI的文章。如果研究是在HPE的正式HPE培训项目中进行的,并且特别提到了学生如何与GenAI互动,则将其纳入研究。数据被映射到劳里拉德框架的六种学习模式。采用医学教育研究研究质量工具(MERSQI)评估研究质量。结果:33项研究符合纳入标准。GenAI在实践中最常支持学习(73%)、调查(70%)、生产(67%)和获取(55%)。这些研究突出了GenAI的各种教育应用,从阐明复杂的概念到模拟临床情景和生成实践材料。讨论和合作的代表较少(各占12%),这表明GenAI向更个性化的学习转变。调查结果强调了效率和可及性等好处,同时也强调了对批判性思维、学术诚信和同伴互动减少的担忧。结论:本综述为HPE学生的学习提供了与Laurillard现有的六种学习类型一致的见解。尽管GenAI支持个性化和自主学习,但它在协作模式中的作用尚未得到充分探索。
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
Medical Education
Medical Education 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
279
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Education seeks to be the pre-eminent journal in the field of education for health care professionals, and publishes material of the highest quality, reflecting world wide or provocative issues and perspectives. The journal welcomes high quality papers on all aspects of health professional education including; -undergraduate education -postgraduate training -continuing professional development -interprofessional education
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信