Pharmacy meets AI: Effect of a drug information activity on student perceptions of generative artificial intelligence

IF 1.3 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Faria Munir , Heather Ipema , Rahul Nohria , Divita Singh
{"title":"Pharmacy meets AI: Effect of a drug information activity on student perceptions of generative artificial intelligence","authors":"Faria Munir ,&nbsp;Heather Ipema ,&nbsp;Rahul Nohria ,&nbsp;Divita Singh","doi":"10.1016/j.cptl.2025.102439","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The current study assessed pharmacy students' perceptions about generative AI before and after participation in a ChatGPT-based drug information activity.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>In 2024, students at three colleges of pharmacy completed a baseline and post-activity survey on their perceptions of ChatGPT including its reliability, usefulness, and impact on academic performance and critical thinking. The survey was modified from the TAME-ChatGPT assessment and used a 5-point Likert scale. After the baseline survey, students answered clinically relevant drug information questions on their own using primary or tertiary resources and compared their answers with ChatGPT responses. Independent <em>t</em>-test samples were used to compare baseline and post-activity surveys.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 227 students completed the pre-survey and 203 students completed the post-survey. Students' concerns about the reliability of ChatGPT increased after completing the drug information activity (pre-survey: 3.57 ± 0.96; post-survey: 3.88 ± 1.11; <em>p</em> = 0.002). Students' concerns about reliance on ChatGPT and prevention of critical thinking increased (pre-survey: 3.30 ± 1.34; post-survey: 3.57 ± 1.21; <em>p</em> = 0.031). The following areas decreased after the activity: enthusiasm about ChatGPT as learning and research tool (pre-survey: 3.60 ± 1.02; post-survey: 3.32 ± 1.18; <em>p</em> = 0.008), viewing ChatGPT as an important tool for academic success (pre-survey: 3.40 ± 1.13; post-survey: 3.12 ± 1.23; <em>p</em> = 0.015), and concern regarding being accused of plagiarism when using ChatGPT(pre-survey: 4.12 ± 0.96; post-survey: 3.91 ± 1.10; <em>p</em> = 0.031). Open-ended responses revealed that students largely perceived ChatGPT as unreliable for drug information, citing concerns about accuracy and outdated content. However, some students noted its potential usefulness for non-clinical tasks such as generating ideas, organizing content, or providing general overviews.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>After a hands-on ChatGPT-based drug information activity, pharmacy students reported increased concerns about reliability and over-reliance on artificial intelligence-based technology. The results of this study may encourage pharmacy educators to implement classroom activities for active exploration of the benefits and challenges of generative AI.</div></div><div><h3>Contribution to literature</h3><div>Limited published data describes pharmacy student perceptions of artificial intelligence platforms as a drug information source. There is even less literature with pre- and post-data after implementing an activity in which students gain hands-on experience critiquing an artificial intelligence platform response. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate student perceptions after using ChatGPT in the classroom and comparing its performance to their own responses based on information from primary and tertiary literature. The results demonstrate that despite enthusiasm before using ChatGPT, concerns for reliability and hindering thinking increased after a observing the limitations of its performance in answering drug information questions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47501,"journal":{"name":"Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning","volume":"17 10","pages":"Article 102439"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877129725001601","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The current study assessed pharmacy students' perceptions about generative AI before and after participation in a ChatGPT-based drug information activity.

Methods

In 2024, students at three colleges of pharmacy completed a baseline and post-activity survey on their perceptions of ChatGPT including its reliability, usefulness, and impact on academic performance and critical thinking. The survey was modified from the TAME-ChatGPT assessment and used a 5-point Likert scale. After the baseline survey, students answered clinically relevant drug information questions on their own using primary or tertiary resources and compared their answers with ChatGPT responses. Independent t-test samples were used to compare baseline and post-activity surveys.

Results

A total of 227 students completed the pre-survey and 203 students completed the post-survey. Students' concerns about the reliability of ChatGPT increased after completing the drug information activity (pre-survey: 3.57 ± 0.96; post-survey: 3.88 ± 1.11; p = 0.002). Students' concerns about reliance on ChatGPT and prevention of critical thinking increased (pre-survey: 3.30 ± 1.34; post-survey: 3.57 ± 1.21; p = 0.031). The following areas decreased after the activity: enthusiasm about ChatGPT as learning and research tool (pre-survey: 3.60 ± 1.02; post-survey: 3.32 ± 1.18; p = 0.008), viewing ChatGPT as an important tool for academic success (pre-survey: 3.40 ± 1.13; post-survey: 3.12 ± 1.23; p = 0.015), and concern regarding being accused of plagiarism when using ChatGPT(pre-survey: 4.12 ± 0.96; post-survey: 3.91 ± 1.10; p = 0.031). Open-ended responses revealed that students largely perceived ChatGPT as unreliable for drug information, citing concerns about accuracy and outdated content. However, some students noted its potential usefulness for non-clinical tasks such as generating ideas, organizing content, or providing general overviews.

Conclusion

After a hands-on ChatGPT-based drug information activity, pharmacy students reported increased concerns about reliability and over-reliance on artificial intelligence-based technology. The results of this study may encourage pharmacy educators to implement classroom activities for active exploration of the benefits and challenges of generative AI.

Contribution to literature

Limited published data describes pharmacy student perceptions of artificial intelligence platforms as a drug information source. There is even less literature with pre- and post-data after implementing an activity in which students gain hands-on experience critiquing an artificial intelligence platform response. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate student perceptions after using ChatGPT in the classroom and comparing its performance to their own responses based on information from primary and tertiary literature. The results demonstrate that despite enthusiasm before using ChatGPT, concerns for reliability and hindering thinking increased after a observing the limitations of its performance in answering drug information questions.
药学与人工智能:药物信息活动对学生对生成式人工智能认知的影响
目的本研究评估药学学生在参与基于chatgpt的药物信息活动前后对生成式人工智能的认知。方法在2024年,三所药学院的学生完成了一项关于他们对ChatGPT的看法的基线和活动后调查,包括其可靠性、有用性以及对学业成绩和批判性思维的影响。该调查在TAME-ChatGPT评估基础上进行了修改,并使用了5分李克特量表。基线调查结束后,学生利用一级或三级资源自行回答临床相关药物信息问题,并与ChatGPT的回答进行比较。使用独立t检验样本比较基线和活动后调查。结果共227名学生完成预调查,203名学生完成后调查。学生在完成药物信息活动后,对ChatGPT信度的关注度增加(预调查:3.57±0.96;后测:3.88±1.11;p = 0.002)。学生对依赖ChatGPT和防止批判性思维的担忧增加(调查前:3.30±1.34;后测:3.57±1.21;p = 0.031)。活动结束后,对ChatGPT作为学习和研究工具的热情有所下降(预调查:3.60±1.02;后测:3.32±1.18;p = 0.008),认为ChatGPT是学业成功的重要工具(预调查:3.40±1.13;后测:3.12±1.23;p = 0.015),以及在使用ChatGPT时担心被指控抄袭(预调查:4.12±0.96;后测:3.91±1.10;p = 0.031)。开放式回答显示,学生大多认为ChatGPT在药物信息方面不可靠,理由是担心准确性和内容过时。然而,一些学生注意到它在非临床任务中的潜在用途,如产生想法、组织内容或提供总体概述。在一次基于chatgpt的药物信息实践活动后,药学专业学生报告了对可靠性和过度依赖基于人工智能的技术的担忧。这项研究的结果可能会鼓励药学教育工作者实施课堂活动,积极探索生成式人工智能的好处和挑战。对文献的贡献有限的已发表数据描述了药学学生对人工智能平台作为药物信息源的看法。在实施一项让学生获得批评人工智能平台响应的实践经验的活动后,关于前后数据的文献甚至更少。因此,本研究旨在评估学生在课堂上使用ChatGPT后的看法,并将其表现与他们自己基于小学和大学文献信息的反应进行比较。结果表明,尽管在使用ChatGPT之前热情高涨,但在观察到其在回答药物信息问题方面的性能局限性后,对可靠性和阻碍思维的担忧增加了。
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
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
192
×
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