生成人工智能和学生生成兽医讲义的比较。

IF 1.1 3区 农林科学 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Ryan M B Gibson, Sarah S Tomberlin, Laci O Mackay, Chad D Foradori
{"title":"生成人工智能和学生生成兽医讲义的比较。","authors":"Ryan M B Gibson, Sarah S Tomberlin, Laci O Mackay, Chad D Foradori","doi":"10.3138/jvme-2025-0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Generative artificial intelligence (gAI) is becoming increasingly prevalent in our daily lives. Students across multiple disciplines are using gAI for writing assessments and completing projects. This leads to the question: could gAI platforms perform similarly, worse, or better than veterinary students when asked to create discharge handouts for select veterinary neurological conditions? A total of 24 professionals and educators graded handouts based on content, clarity, client education, empathy, and professionalism for two canine neurological conditions (seizures and intervertebral disc disease). Each condition had handouts created by a high-performing student, a random/unknown student whose work was deemed to represent the average student at our institution, ChatGPT 4.0, and Google Bard. The high-performing student's handout scored higher in several categories compared with AI-generated handouts and scored statistically higher overall. Specifically, the high-performing student's seizure handout scored significantly higher in accuracy/completeness and client education than the Bard handout. Both student handouts scored significantly higher for empathy and client support than the AI tools. For the intervertebral disc disease handouts, the AI-generated handouts scored higher in clarity and organization than the random student handout, with the high-performing student's handout scoring higher in empathy and client support over the Bard-generated handout. Upon the conclusion of grading, reviewers completed a survey asking them to guess the authorship of each handout. Veterinary educators and professionals could not distinguish between gAI- and student-developed client handouts. However, the findings suggest that students have the potential to outperform current gAI technology in multiple areas, including conveying empathy.</p>","PeriodicalId":17575,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary medical education","volume":" ","pages":"e20250003"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Generative Artificial Intelligence and Student-Generated Veterinary Handouts.\",\"authors\":\"Ryan M B Gibson, Sarah S Tomberlin, Laci O Mackay, Chad D Foradori\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/jvme-2025-0003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Generative artificial intelligence (gAI) is becoming increasingly prevalent in our daily lives. Students across multiple disciplines are using gAI for writing assessments and completing projects. This leads to the question: could gAI platforms perform similarly, worse, or better than veterinary students when asked to create discharge handouts for select veterinary neurological conditions? A total of 24 professionals and educators graded handouts based on content, clarity, client education, empathy, and professionalism for two canine neurological conditions (seizures and intervertebral disc disease). Each condition had handouts created by a high-performing student, a random/unknown student whose work was deemed to represent the average student at our institution, ChatGPT 4.0, and Google Bard. The high-performing student's handout scored higher in several categories compared with AI-generated handouts and scored statistically higher overall. Specifically, the high-performing student's seizure handout scored significantly higher in accuracy/completeness and client education than the Bard handout. Both student handouts scored significantly higher for empathy and client support than the AI tools. For the intervertebral disc disease handouts, the AI-generated handouts scored higher in clarity and organization than the random student handout, with the high-performing student's handout scoring higher in empathy and client support over the Bard-generated handout. Upon the conclusion of grading, reviewers completed a survey asking them to guess the authorship of each handout. Veterinary educators and professionals could not distinguish between gAI- and student-developed client handouts. However, the findings suggest that students have the potential to outperform current gAI technology in multiple areas, including conveying empathy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17575,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of veterinary medical education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e20250003\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of veterinary medical education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme-2025-0003\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary medical education","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme-2025-0003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

生成式人工智能(gAI)在我们的日常生活中越来越普遍。各个学科的学生都在使用gAI来撰写评估和完成项目。这就引出了一个问题:当被要求为选定的兽医神经系统疾病创建出院讲义时,gAI平台的表现与兽医学生相似、更差还是更好?共有24名专业人士和教育工作者根据内容、清晰度、客户教育、同理心和两种犬神经疾病(癫痫发作和椎间盘疾病)的专业程度对讲义进行评分。每个条件都有一个高表现的学生制作的讲义,一个随机的/未知的学生,他的工作被认为代表了我们机构的平均学生,ChatGPT 4.0和b谷歌巴德。与人工智能生成的讲义相比,表现优异的学生的讲义在几个方面得分更高,总体得分也更高。具体来说,表现优异的学生的癫痫讲义在准确性/完整性和客户教育方面的得分明显高于巴德讲义。两份学生讲义在同理心和客户支持方面的得分都明显高于人工智能工具。对于椎间盘疾病讲义,人工智能生成的讲义在清晰度和组织性方面得分高于随机学生讲义,表现出色的学生讲义在同理心和客户支持方面得分高于巴德生成的讲义。评分结束后,审稿人完成了一项调查,要求他们猜测每个讲义的作者。兽医教育者和专业人士无法区分gAI和学生开发的客户手册。然而,研究结果表明,学生有潜力在多个领域超越目前的人工智能技术,包括表达同理心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Generative Artificial Intelligence and Student-Generated Veterinary Handouts.

Generative artificial intelligence (gAI) is becoming increasingly prevalent in our daily lives. Students across multiple disciplines are using gAI for writing assessments and completing projects. This leads to the question: could gAI platforms perform similarly, worse, or better than veterinary students when asked to create discharge handouts for select veterinary neurological conditions? A total of 24 professionals and educators graded handouts based on content, clarity, client education, empathy, and professionalism for two canine neurological conditions (seizures and intervertebral disc disease). Each condition had handouts created by a high-performing student, a random/unknown student whose work was deemed to represent the average student at our institution, ChatGPT 4.0, and Google Bard. The high-performing student's handout scored higher in several categories compared with AI-generated handouts and scored statistically higher overall. Specifically, the high-performing student's seizure handout scored significantly higher in accuracy/completeness and client education than the Bard handout. Both student handouts scored significantly higher for empathy and client support than the AI tools. For the intervertebral disc disease handouts, the AI-generated handouts scored higher in clarity and organization than the random student handout, with the high-performing student's handout scoring higher in empathy and client support over the Bard-generated handout. Upon the conclusion of grading, reviewers completed a survey asking them to guess the authorship of each handout. Veterinary educators and professionals could not distinguish between gAI- and student-developed client handouts. However, the findings suggest that students have the potential to outperform current gAI technology in multiple areas, including conveying empathy.

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
2.20
自引率
30.00%
发文量
113
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Veterinary Medical Education (JVME) is the peer-reviewed scholarly journal of the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC). As an internationally distributed journal, JVME provides a forum for the exchange of ideas, research, and discoveries about veterinary medical education. This exchange benefits veterinary faculty, students, and the veterinary profession as a whole by preparing veterinarians to better perform their professional activities and to meet the needs of society. The journal’s areas of focus include best practices and educational methods in veterinary education; recruitment, training, and mentoring of students at all levels of education, including undergraduate, graduate, veterinary technology, and continuing education; clinical instruction and assessment; institutional policy; and other challenges and issues faced by veterinary educators domestically and internationally. Veterinary faculty of all countries are encouraged to participate as contributors, reviewers, and institutional representatives.
×
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