Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Medical Education

Date Submitted: Jul 26, 2023
Date Accepted: Dec 2, 2023

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Cross-Sectional Study Among Medical Students on Application, Education, and Ethical Aspects

Weidener L, Fischer M

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Cross-Sectional Study Among Medical Students on Application, Education, and Ethical Aspects

JMIR Med Educ 2024;10:e51247

DOI: 10.2196/51247

PMID: 38180787

PMCID: 10799276

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: A Cross-Sectional Study among Medical Students on Application, Education, and Ethical Aspects

  • Lukas Weidener; 
  • Michael Fischer

ABSTRACT

Background:

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine not only directly impacts the medical profession but is also increasingly associated with various potential ethical aspects. Additionally, the expanding use of AI and AI-based applications such as ChatGPT demands a corresponding shift in medical education to adequately prepare future practitioners for the effective utilization of these tools and to address the associated ethical challenges they present

Objective:

This study investigated the influence of AI-based chat applications such as ChatGPT on the perceptions of medical students from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland regarding the use of AI in medicine and the teaching of AI and AI ethics in medical education

Methods:

This cross-sectional study, conducted from June 15 to July 15, 2023, surveyed medical students across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, using an online questionnaire. This study aimed to assess students' perceptions of AI in medicine, and the integration of AI and AI ethics into medical education. The questionnaire, which included 53 items across six sections, was developed and pre-tested. Data analysis employed descriptive statistics (median, mode, IQR, total number, and percentages) and either chi-square or Mann-Whitney U tests as appropriate

Results:

Surveying 487 medical students across Germany, Austria, and Switzerland revealed limited formal education on AI or AI ethics within medical curricula, although 38.8% had prior experience with AI-based chat applications. Despite varied prior exposures, 71.7% anticipated AI's positive impact of AI on medicine. There was widespread consensus (74.9%) on the need for AI and AI ethics instruction in medical education, although the current offerings were deemed inadequate. Regarding AI ethics education content, all proposed topics were rated highly relevant

Conclusions:

This study revealed a pronounced discrepancy between the usage of AI-based (chat) applications, such as ChatGPT, among medical students in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, and the teaching of AI in medical education. To adequately prepare future medical professionals, there is an urgent need to integrate AI and AI ethics into medical curricula


 Citation

Please cite as:

Weidener L, Fischer M

Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: Cross-Sectional Study Among Medical Students on Application, Education, and Ethical Aspects

JMIR Med Educ 2024;10:e51247

DOI: 10.2196/51247

PMID: 38180787

PMCID: 10799276

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.