日本医学生对生成式人工智能的使用与评价

IF 1.8 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
JMA journal Pub Date : 2025-07-15 Epub Date: 2025-07-02 DOI:10.31662/jmaj.2024-0375
Izuki Amano, Kisho Obi-Nagata, Ayane Ninomiya, Yuki Fujiwara, Noriyuki Koibuchi
{"title":"日本医学生对生成式人工智能的使用与评价","authors":"Izuki Amano, Kisho Obi-Nagata, Ayane Ninomiya, Yuki Fujiwara, Noriyuki Koibuchi","doi":"10.31662/jmaj.2024-0375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has become more accessible due to technological advancements. While it can support more efficient learning, improper use may lead to legal issues or hinder self-directed learning. Medical education is no exception, as generative AI has the potential to become a powerful tool. However, its practicality remains uncertain. Therefore, we investigated how generative AI is perceived among medical students and utilized within the realm of medical education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In January 2024, we conducted a study with 123 second-year medical students who had completed a physiology course and laboratory training at Gunma University, Japan. Students used ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) 3.5 (OpenAI) for four tasks and evaluated its responses. A survey on the use of generative AI was also conducted. Responses from 117 participants were analyzed, excluding six non-participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the students, 41.9% had used ChatGPT. The average scores for tasks 1-4 were 6.5, 4.6, 7.4, and 6.2 out of 10, respectively. Although 13% had a negative impression, 54 students found it challenging to apply for medical purposes. However, 64.1% expressed a willingness to continue using generative AI, provided its use extended beyond medical contexts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nearly 60% of students had never used generative AI before, which is consistent with general usage trends. Although they were impressed by the speed of generative AI responses, many students found that it lacked precision for medical studies and required additional verification. Limitations of generative AI, such as \"hallucinations,\" were evident in medical education. It remains important to educate students on AI literacy and their understanding of the potential issues that generative AI could bring about.</p>","PeriodicalId":73550,"journal":{"name":"JMA journal","volume":"8 3","pages":"730-735"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12328371/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use and Evaluation of Generative Artificial Intelligence by Medical Students in Japan.\",\"authors\":\"Izuki Amano, Kisho Obi-Nagata, Ayane Ninomiya, Yuki Fujiwara, Noriyuki Koibuchi\",\"doi\":\"10.31662/jmaj.2024-0375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has become more accessible due to technological advancements. While it can support more efficient learning, improper use may lead to legal issues or hinder self-directed learning. Medical education is no exception, as generative AI has the potential to become a powerful tool. However, its practicality remains uncertain. Therefore, we investigated how generative AI is perceived among medical students and utilized within the realm of medical education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In January 2024, we conducted a study with 123 second-year medical students who had completed a physiology course and laboratory training at Gunma University, Japan. Students used ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) 3.5 (OpenAI) for four tasks and evaluated its responses. A survey on the use of generative AI was also conducted. Responses from 117 participants were analyzed, excluding six non-participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the students, 41.9% had used ChatGPT. The average scores for tasks 1-4 were 6.5, 4.6, 7.4, and 6.2 out of 10, respectively. Although 13% had a negative impression, 54 students found it challenging to apply for medical purposes. However, 64.1% expressed a willingness to continue using generative AI, provided its use extended beyond medical contexts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Nearly 60% of students had never used generative AI before, which is consistent with general usage trends. Although they were impressed by the speed of generative AI responses, many students found that it lacked precision for medical studies and required additional verification. Limitations of generative AI, such as \\\"hallucinations,\\\" were evident in medical education. It remains important to educate students on AI literacy and their understanding of the potential issues that generative AI could bring about.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMA journal\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"730-735\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12328371/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMA journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31662/jmaj.2024-0375\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMA journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31662/jmaj.2024-0375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:由于技术的进步,生成式人工智能(AI)变得越来越容易获得。虽然它可以支持更有效的学习,但不当使用可能会导致法律问题或阻碍自主学习。医学教育也不例外,因为生成式人工智能有可能成为一种强大的工具。然而,它的实用性仍不确定。因此,我们调查了医学生如何感知生成人工智能,并在医学教育领域内使用。方法:于2024年1月在日本群马大学完成生理学课程和实验室训练的医二年级学生123名进行了研究。学生使用ChatGPT(聊天生成预训练变压器)3.5 (OpenAI)完成四项任务,并评估其反应。对生成式人工智能的使用也进行了调查。117名参与者的回答被分析,不包括6名非参与者。结果:41.9%的学生使用过ChatGPT。任务1-4的平均得分分别为6.5、4.6、7.4和6.2分(满分为10分)。尽管13%的学生对医学有负面印象,但有54名学生认为申请医学专业很有挑战性。然而,64.1%的受访者表示愿意继续使用生成式人工智能,前提是它的使用范围超出医疗领域。结论:近60%的学生从未使用过生成式AI,这与总体使用趋势一致。尽管他们对生成式人工智能反应的速度印象深刻,但许多学生发现它在医学研究中缺乏准确性,需要额外的验证。生成式人工智能的局限性,比如“幻觉”,在医学教育中是显而易见的。对学生进行人工智能素养教育,让他们了解生成式人工智能可能带来的潜在问题,这一点仍然很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Use and Evaluation of Generative Artificial Intelligence by Medical Students in Japan.

Use and Evaluation of Generative Artificial Intelligence by Medical Students in Japan.

Introduction: Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has become more accessible due to technological advancements. While it can support more efficient learning, improper use may lead to legal issues or hinder self-directed learning. Medical education is no exception, as generative AI has the potential to become a powerful tool. However, its practicality remains uncertain. Therefore, we investigated how generative AI is perceived among medical students and utilized within the realm of medical education.

Methods: In January 2024, we conducted a study with 123 second-year medical students who had completed a physiology course and laboratory training at Gunma University, Japan. Students used ChatGPT (Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer) 3.5 (OpenAI) for four tasks and evaluated its responses. A survey on the use of generative AI was also conducted. Responses from 117 participants were analyzed, excluding six non-participants.

Results: Among the students, 41.9% had used ChatGPT. The average scores for tasks 1-4 were 6.5, 4.6, 7.4, and 6.2 out of 10, respectively. Although 13% had a negative impression, 54 students found it challenging to apply for medical purposes. However, 64.1% expressed a willingness to continue using generative AI, provided its use extended beyond medical contexts.

Conclusions: Nearly 60% of students had never used generative AI before, which is consistent with general usage trends. Although they were impressed by the speed of generative AI responses, many students found that it lacked precision for medical studies and required additional verification. Limitations of generative AI, such as "hallucinations," were evident in medical education. It remains important to educate students on AI literacy and their understanding of the potential issues that generative AI could bring about.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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