Medical Science Educator最新文献

{"title":"Medical students' performance on Point-of-Care Ultrasound stations during high stakes summative OSCEs at the University of Saskatchewan.","authors":"Ryan Good, Juliana Wilson, Joshua C Kaine, Vijay J Daniels, Joshua Lloyd, Neda Moslemi, Gillian Sheppard, Paul Olszynski","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02753-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02753-0","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a valuable clinical skill that improves clinical care but requires substantial training and curricular resources. Validated assessment tools provide empirical evidence regarding trainee performance while also informing program-level evaluation. The University of Saskatchewan's medical school integrated two POCUS stations for use in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) to assess skill acquisition. The purpose of our study is to describe implementation of POCUS OSCE stations with respect to student performance and station psychometrics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two POCUS applications (detection of pleural effusion and abdominal free fluid) were integrated into the Clinical Skills course OSCEs at the University of Saskatchewan's medical school. To assess student performance on each station, Borderline Regression Analysis was utilized as the standard-setting method, incorporating data from checklist and global rating.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>First year medical students (<i>n</i> = 105) performed POCUS for the detection of pleural effusion (pass rate 70.86%) while second year students (<i>n</i> = 102) performed POCUS for detection of abdominal free fluid (pass rate 77.45%). Analysis of each POCUS station revealed high internal consistency, good correlation across checklist items and global rating (inter-grade discrimination), and low between-group variance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>First- and second-year medical students demonstrated pass rates of 70.86% and 77% respectively in the POCUS stations of each high stakes summative OSCE. Analysis showed strong reliability and correlation between technical checklists and global ratings, supporting the validity of the evaluation methods. These findings highlight that focused training on foundational POCUS applications leads to meaningful skill development.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-026-02753-0.</p>","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 4","pages":"1885-1893"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582675/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148991756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reimagining Open-Ended Assessment through Generative AI: From Reliability to Research Frontiers.","authors":"Louis Robert C Sison, Ronilo P Antonio","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02754-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02754-z","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 3","pages":"1155-1156"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13356120/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148431313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Does Artificial Intelligence Belong in Medical Admissions Screening? A Student-Informed Commentary on Risks, Benefits, and Hybrid Use.","authors":"Madeleine Zanin, Hirday Josan, Doug Kavanagh, Peter Tai, Fok-Han Leung","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02747-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02747-y","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical school application processes is gaining traction. Machine learning, natural language processing (NLP), and large language models (LLM) are all tools being used to analyze both structured and unstructured aspects of medical school and residency program applications. Many studies have outlined the benefits of this approach, namely in reducing burden on admissions committees, reducing bias, and improving efficiency. However, little attention has been paid to the student perspective on this integration of AI. As students, we have concerns with the use of AI in this process due to potential limitations in appreciating emotional nuance, the inconsistency of generative AI, the possibility of perpetuating existing bias, and the opportunity for students to take advantage of systemic loopholes. Although we hold these concerns, we also recognize the benefits that could result from the implementation of AI. As such, we believe that a hybrid model that leverages the strengths of both human reviewers and AI is the most responsible and optimal path forward. A method that uses AI as a first-pass tool and leaves the final decision to human evaluators would promote efficiency and preserve the essential role that human judgement plays in the admissions process. Prioritizing transparency throughout will help reduce concerns that students, like ourselves, may have. The future of medicine depends on an admissions process that is able to select compassionate and empathetic future physicians in an efficient and fair manner.</p>","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 4","pages":"2113-2116"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582751/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148991307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Hybrid Physical Examination: Integrating Peer Feedback with Standardized Patient Encounters.","authors":"Shivani Srivastava, Sophia Chen, Rachel Rosenberg, Christin Traba, Jeremy Grachan, Robyn Kampf","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02751-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02751-2","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Physical examination skills are fundamental to clinical practice, yet traditional training models often fail to integrate structured peer feedback with standardized patient (SP) encounters, limiting development of both clinical and feedback competencies.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluated a novel hybrid physical examination training model that integrates structured peer feedback with SP encounters across multiple organ systems, hypothesizing that this approach would improve students' physical examination knowledge, confidence, and feedback literacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective educational intervention involved a cohort of 175 preclinical students at a U.S. medical school across four systems (musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, pulmonary, gastrointestinal) during 2025. Each session comprised facilitator-led peer practice using standardized checklists, followed by SP encounters where students rotated through examiner and observer roles, providing structured oral and written feedback. Pre- and post-session surveys assessed confidence and perceptions using a 5-point Likert scale, while ungraded knowledge tests measured skill acquisition. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Knowledge scores improved significantly in musculoskeletal (MSK) (4.02 to 4.28, <i>p</i> = 0.048), cardiovascular (CV) (3.77 to 4.18, <i>p</i> = 0.018), and gastrointestinal (GI) (3.47 to 4.05, <i>p</i> = 0.028) sessions. Confidence in performing physical examinations increased significantly across all systems (all <i>p</i> < 0.001). Perceptions of SP educational value improved in MSK (4.26 to 4.69, <i>p</i> < 0.001), CV (4.41 to 4.71, <i>p</i> = 0.009), and GI (4.29 to 4.95, <i>p</i> < 0.001) sessions. Ratings for both giving and receiving feedback improved significantly in most sessions. Pulmonary session results showed confidence gains but non-significant changes in other measures, likely due to reduced response rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The hybrid model effectively enhanced physical examination knowledge, confidence, and feedback literacy across multiple organ systems. Integration of structured peer feedback with SP-based practice prepares students for collaborative and feedback-rich clinical environments. This model shows promise for strengthening skill acquisition and feedback competence in undergraduate medical education.</p>","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 4","pages":"1827-1837"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582684/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148991738","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Methodological Considerations in Assessing Lifestyle Behaviors among Medical Students.","authors":"Malaha Ali","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02748-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02748-x","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 4","pages":"2119-2120"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582743/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148991744","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Re-evaluating Digital Learning Claims: A Critical Appraisal of Resource use and Academic Performance Among Medical Students.","authors":"Thirunavukkarasu Arun Babu, Vijayan Sharmila","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02750-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02750-3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 3","pages":"1147-1148"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13356168/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148431288","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From Hype to Reality: AI's Rapid Transformation of Health-Sciences Professions Education.","authors":"Douglas McKell, Mark Hernandez, Joanna Apple, Catherine Gathu, Erica Ausel, Chun Cheng Andy Chen, Susan Ely, Steve Garwood, Kin Ly, Mihail Mitov, Akshata R Naik, Amin Shah, Tracey A H Taylor, Thomas Thesen","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02745-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02745-0","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 3","pages":"1641-1646"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13355993/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148431289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Pedagogically Legitimate but Faculty-Contested: Cultural and Professional Tensions in Peer-Assisted Clinical Skills Training.","authors":"Selçuk Akturan, Yasemin Güner","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02746-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02746-z","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Although evidence supporting peer-assisted learning in clinical skills education is growing, qualitative insights into stakeholder perceptions remain limited. Informed by sociocultural learning perspectives, peer-assisted clinical skills training may be pedagogically effective while simultaneously challenging established educational authority and faculty role boundaries. This study aimed to explore multi-stakeholder perceptions of peer-assisted clinical skills training in the preclinical phase of medical education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This qualitative study employed a thematic analysis approach. Semi-structured in-depth or focus group interviews were conducted with medical students, peer educators, and faculty members following their initial exposure to peer-led clinical skills sessions. Data were analyzed iteratively to capture shared and divergent perspectives across stakeholder groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Peer-assisted training was perceived to enhance psychological safety and promote active learner participation. Peer educators were viewed as technically competent and effective facilitators of learning. However, faculty members expressed tensions related to educational authority, professional identity, and hierarchical norms. These concerns were not primarily linked to the perceived educational quality of peer-assisted training but rather to challenges associated with shifting instructional roles.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings suggest that barriers to the integration of peer-assisted clinical skills training are predominantly cultural and institutional rather than pedagogical. Conceptualized through sociocultural and professional identity lenses, faculty resistance appears to reflect role-related tensions rather than opposition to peer learning itself. A supervised hybrid model, integrating peer educators with visible faculty oversight, emerged across stakeholder groups as the most sustainable and acceptable approach for implementing peer-assisted clinical skills training.</p>","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 4","pages":"1945-1953"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582671/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148991859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"LLMs and Reflective Practice: A Note on Cognitive Processes and Learning.","authors":"Remy M J P Rikers","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02749-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02749-w","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 3","pages":"1151"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13355957/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148431256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reflect-Compare-Revise (RCR): A Practitioner Inquiry on Integrating Generative AI in Nursing Care Planning Education.","authors":"Aaron A Funa, Jhonner D Ricafort, Renz Alvin E Gabay","doi":"10.1007/s40670-026-02736-1","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s40670-026-02736-1","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Generative AI can improve the linguistic fluency and organization of student writing, but dependence on it for answers may weaken clinical reasoning, raising concerns about AI-shaped nursing judgment and accountability. This practitioner action research developed and implemented a Reflect-Compare-Revise (RCR) approach for integrating ChatGPT into a nursing care plan (NCP) task using a standardized term-newborn case. Second-year nursing students (n = 40) produced three linked artifacts (human-only draft, ChatGPT output, and revised submission) and completed reflection journals; 15 students joined semi-structured interviews, and the teacher-researcher kept a reflexivity log. Artifacts were coded for accuracy, completeness, clinical appropriateness, verification actions, and revision depth, and reflections were thematically analyzed. RCR preserved cognitive ownership through human-first drafting, positioned AI output as a comparator, and prompted discrepancy-driven verification and revision. Revised NCPs more often showed cue-aligned diagnoses, newborn-appropriate targets and monitoring intervals, feasible shift-bounded actions, and auditable documentation checkpoints. Students valued organizational support but identified risks of generic output, overreliance, and confident misinformation, reinforcing the need for clear boundaries, privacy safeguards, and equitable access. Findings were translated into a classroom framework and policy guidelines that operationalize responsible GenAI use through mandatory human-first work, verification routines, transparent documentation, and assessment anchored on revision depth.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-026-02736-1.</p>","PeriodicalId":37113,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Educator","volume":"36 4","pages":"1991-2004"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2026-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582707/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148991855","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}