在医学教育中整合AI转录软件:欧安组织文献的比较研究。

Q4 Medicine
Molly Lien, Carson Max, Rachael Fanciullo, Roy Mortinsen, Arica Schuknecht, Mercedes Kotalik, Valeriy Kozmenko
{"title":"在医学教育中整合AI转录软件:欧安组织文献的比较研究。","authors":"Molly Lien, Carson Max, Rachael Fanciullo, Roy Mortinsen, Arica Schuknecht, Mercedes Kotalik, Valeriy Kozmenko","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As AI technology becomes increasingly embedded in clinical workflows, medical education must evolve to prepare students for AI-assisted documentation. Freed AI, a real-time transcription tool, offers potential benefits in both efficiency and documentation quality. This study compares the performance of Freed AI-generated notes to student-generated notes across simulated clinical encounters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First-year medical students participated in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) covering three conditions: cough, falls, and back pain. Each encounter was transcribed both by students and Freed AI. Notes were scored for completeness, accuracy, and medical relevance. Two-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests were conducted to assess differences across source (AI vs. student) and condition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Freed AI significantly outperformed student-generated notes overall, with a mean score advantage of approximately 3.78 points. A significant interaction was found between source and condition, with AI demonstrating a robust advantage in back pain scenarios. While AI also scored higher in falls and cough, these differences were not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Condition alone also had a significant effect, with back pain yielding the lowest overall scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Freed AI transcription significantly enhances documentation quality, particularly in complex scenarios like back pain. These findings support the integration of AI tools into medical education to augment student performance, though continued attention to clinical reasoning and variance in case complexity remains essential.</p>","PeriodicalId":39219,"journal":{"name":"South Dakota medicine : the journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association","volume":"78 suppl 5","pages":"s31-s32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integrating AI Transcription Software in Medical Education: A Comparative Study of OSCE Documentation.\",\"authors\":\"Molly Lien, Carson Max, Rachael Fanciullo, Roy Mortinsen, Arica Schuknecht, Mercedes Kotalik, Valeriy Kozmenko\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As AI technology becomes increasingly embedded in clinical workflows, medical education must evolve to prepare students for AI-assisted documentation. Freed AI, a real-time transcription tool, offers potential benefits in both efficiency and documentation quality. This study compares the performance of Freed AI-generated notes to student-generated notes across simulated clinical encounters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>First-year medical students participated in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) covering three conditions: cough, falls, and back pain. Each encounter was transcribed both by students and Freed AI. Notes were scored for completeness, accuracy, and medical relevance. Two-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests were conducted to assess differences across source (AI vs. student) and condition.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Freed AI significantly outperformed student-generated notes overall, with a mean score advantage of approximately 3.78 points. A significant interaction was found between source and condition, with AI demonstrating a robust advantage in back pain scenarios. While AI also scored higher in falls and cough, these differences were not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Condition alone also had a significant effect, with back pain yielding the lowest overall scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Freed AI transcription significantly enhances documentation quality, particularly in complex scenarios like back pain. These findings support the integration of AI tools into medical education to augment student performance, though continued attention to clinical reasoning and variance in case complexity remains essential.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South Dakota medicine : the journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association\",\"volume\":\"78 suppl 5\",\"pages\":\"s31-s32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South Dakota medicine : the journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South Dakota medicine : the journal of the South Dakota State Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着人工智能技术越来越多地嵌入临床工作流程,医学教育必须不断发展,使学生为人工智能辅助文档做好准备。Freed AI是一种实时转录工具,在效率和文档质量方面都有潜在的好处。这项研究比较了Freed人工智能生成的笔记和学生生成的笔记在模拟临床遭遇中的表现。方法:一年级医学生参加客观结构化临床检查(oses),包括咳嗽、跌倒和背部疼痛三种情况。每次遭遇战都由学生和被释放的AI进行转录。对笔记的完整性、准确性和医学相关性进行评分。进行了双向方差分析和事后检验,以评估不同来源(人工智能与学生)和条件的差异。结果:自由人工智能的总体表现明显优于学生生成的笔记,平均得分优势约为3.78分。疼痛源和疼痛状态之间存在显著的相互作用,人工智能在背痛方面表现出强大的优势。虽然人工智能在跌倒和咳嗽方面的得分也更高,但经过多次比较校正后,这些差异没有统计学意义。单独的身体状况也有显著的影响,背部疼痛的总体得分最低。结论:释放AI转录显著提高了文档质量,特别是在背痛等复杂情况下。这些发现支持将人工智能工具整合到医学教育中,以提高学生的表现,尽管继续关注临床推理和病例复杂性的差异仍然至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Integrating AI Transcription Software in Medical Education: A Comparative Study of OSCE Documentation.

Background: As AI technology becomes increasingly embedded in clinical workflows, medical education must evolve to prepare students for AI-assisted documentation. Freed AI, a real-time transcription tool, offers potential benefits in both efficiency and documentation quality. This study compares the performance of Freed AI-generated notes to student-generated notes across simulated clinical encounters.

Methods: First-year medical students participated in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) covering three conditions: cough, falls, and back pain. Each encounter was transcribed both by students and Freed AI. Notes were scored for completeness, accuracy, and medical relevance. Two-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests were conducted to assess differences across source (AI vs. student) and condition.

Results: Freed AI significantly outperformed student-generated notes overall, with a mean score advantage of approximately 3.78 points. A significant interaction was found between source and condition, with AI demonstrating a robust advantage in back pain scenarios. While AI also scored higher in falls and cough, these differences were not statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons. Condition alone also had a significant effect, with back pain yielding the lowest overall scores.

Conclusion: Freed AI transcription significantly enhances documentation quality, particularly in complex scenarios like back pain. These findings support the integration of AI tools into medical education to augment student performance, though continued attention to clinical reasoning and variance in case complexity remains essential.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
×
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