To examine the artificial intelligence (AI) tools currently being studied in modern medical education, and critically evaluate the level of validation and the quality of evidence presented in each individual study.
Methods
This review (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023410752) was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. A database search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Articles written in the English language between 2000 and March 2023 were reviewed retrospectively using the MeSH Terms “AI” and “medical education” A total of 4642 potentially relevant studies were found.
Results
After a thorough screening process, 36 studies were included in the final analysis. These studies consisted of 26 quantitative studies and 10 studies investigated the development and validation of AI tools. When examining the results of studies in which Support vector machines (SVMs) were employed, it has demonstrated high accuracy in assessing students’ experiences, diagnosing acute abdominal pain, classifying skilled and novice participants, and evaluating surgical training levels. Particularly in the comparison of surgical skill levels, it has achieved an accuracy rate of over 92%.
Conclusion
AI tools demonstrated effectiveness in improving practical skills, diagnosing diseases, and evaluating student performance. However, further research with rigorous validation is required to identify the most effective AI tools for medical education.
HellerNWeightC. “The algorithm will see you now”: the role of artificial (and real) intelligence in the future of urology. Eur Urol Focus. 2021;7(4):669-671. doi:10.1016/j.euf.2021.07.010
2.
TopolEJ. High-performance medicine: the convergence of human and artificial intelligence. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):44-56. doi:10.1038/s41591-018-0300-7
3.
KansalRBawaABansalA, et al.Differences in knowledge and perspectives on the usage of artificial intelligence among doctors and medical students of a developing country: a cross-sectional study. Cureus. 2022;14(1):1-7. doi:10.7759/cureus.21434
4.
WaymelQBadrSDemondionXCottenAJacquesT. Impact of the rise of artificial intelligence in radiology: what do radiologists think?Diagn Interv Imaging. 2019;100(6):327-336. doi:10.1016/j.diii.2019.03.015
5.
CivanerMMUncuYBulutFChalilEGTatliA. Artificial intelligence in medical education: a cross-sectional needs assessment. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):1-9. doi:10.1186/s12909-022-03852-3
6.
OoiSKGMakmurASoonAYQ, et al.Attitudes toward artificial intelligence in radiology with learner needs assessment within radiology residency programmes: a national multi-programme survey. Singapore Med J. 2021;62(3):126-134. doi:10.11622/smedj.2019141
7.
JhaNShankarPRAl-BetarMAMukhiaRHadaKPalaianS. Undergraduate medical students’ and interns’ knowledge and perception of artificial intelligence in medicine. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2022;13(August):927-937. doi:10.2147/AMEP.S368519
8.
Collado-MesaFAlvarezEArheartK. The role of artificial intelligence in diagnostic radiology: a survey at a single radiology residency training program. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(12):1753-1757. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2017.12.021
9.
Pinto dos SantosDGieseDBrodehlS, et al.Medical students’ attitude towards artificial intelligence: a multicentre survey. Eur Radiol. 2019;29(4):1640-1646. doi:10.1007/s00330-018-5601-1
10.
van HoekJHuberALeichtleA, et al.A survey on the future of radiology among radiologists, medical students and surgeons: students and surgeons tend to be more skeptical about artificial intelligence and radiologists may fear that other disciplines take over. Eur J Radiol. 2019;121:108742. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2019.108742
11.
SitCSrinivasanRAmlaniA, et al.Attitudes and perceptions of UK medical students towards artificial intelligence and radiology: a multicentre survey. Insights Imaging. 2020;11(1):7-12. doi:10.1186/s13244-019-0830-7
12.
TengMSinglaRYauO, et al.Health care students’ perspectives on artificial intelligence: countrywide survey in Canada. JMIR Med Educ. 2022;8(1):e33390. doi:10.2196/33390
13.
BleaseCKharkoAAnnoniMGaabJLocherC. Machine learning in clinical psychology and psychotherapy education: a mixed methods pilot survey of postgraduate students at a Swiss University. Front Public Health. 2021;9(April):623088. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.623088
14.
BleaseCKharkoABernsteinM, et al.Machine learning in medical education: a survey of the experiences and opinions of medical students in Ireland. BMJ Health Care Inform. 2022;29(1):1-4. doi:10.1136/bmjhci-2021-100480
15.
ParkCJYiPHSiegelEL. Medical student perspectives on the impact of artificial intelligence on the practice of medicine. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2021;50(5):614-619. doi:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2020.06.011
16.
DoumatGDaherDGhanemNNKhaterB. Knowledge and attitudes of medical students in Lebanon toward artificial intelligence: a national survey study. Front Artif Intell. 2022;5:1015418. doi:10.3389/frai.2022.1015418
17.
EjazHMcGrathHWongBLHGuiseAVercauterenTShapeyJ. Artificial intelligence and medical education: a global mixed-methods study of medical students’ perspectives. Digit Health. 2022;8:20552076221089099. doi:10.1177/20552076221089099
18.
MoschLAgha-Mir-SalimLSaricaMMBalzerFPoncetteAS. Artificial intelligence in undergraduate medical education. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2022;294:821-822. doi:10.3233/SHTI220597
19.
PucchioARathagirishnanRCatonN, et al.Exploration of exposure to artificial intelligence in undergraduate medical education: a Canadian cross-sectional mixed-methods study. BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):1-12. doi:10.1186/s12909-022-03896-5
20.
Dumić-ČuleIOreškovićTBrkljačićBTiljakMKOreškovićS. The importance of introducing artificial intelligence to the medical curriculum – assessing practitioners’ perspectives. Croat Med J. 2020;61(5):457-464. doi:10.3325/CMJ.2020.61.457
21.
BanerjeeMChiewDPatelKT, et al.The impact of artificial intelligence on clinical education: perceptions of postgraduate trainee doctors in London (UK) and recommendations for trainers. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):1-10. doi:10.1186/s12909-021-02870-x
22.
HuismanMRanschaertEParkerW, et al.An international survey on AI in radiology in 1,041 radiologists and radiology residents part 1: fear of replacement, knowledge, and attitude. Eur Radiol. 2021;31(9):7058-7066. doi:10.1007/s00330-021-07781-5
23.
ShiangTGarwoodEDebenedectisCM. Artificial intelligence-based decision support system (AI-DSS) implementation in radiology residency: introducing residents to AI in the clinical setting. Clin Imaging. 2022;92(April):32-37. doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2022.09.003
24.
SalastekarN V.MaxfieldCHannaTNKrupinskiEAHeitkampDGrimmLJ. Artificial intelligence/machine learning education in radiology: multi-institutional survey of radiology residents in the United States. Acad Radiol. 2023;30(7):1481-1487. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2023.01.005
25.
GongBNugentJPGuestW, et al.Influence of artificial intelligence on Canadian medical students’ preference for radiology specialty: anational survey study. Acad Radiol. 2019;26(4):566-577. doi:10.1016/J.ACRA.2018.10.007
26.
BrandesGIGD’ippolitoGAzzoliniAGMeirellesG. Impact of artificial intelligence on the choice of radiology as a specialty by medical students from the city of São Paulo. Radiol Bras. 2020;53(3):167-170. doi:10.1590/0100-3984.2019.0101
27.
ReederKLeeH. Impact of artificial intelligence on US medical students’ choice of radiology. Clin Imaging. 2022;81:67-71. doi:10.1016/J.CLINIMAG.2021.09.018
28.
Caparrós GalánGSendra PorteroF. Medical students’ perceptions of the impact of artificial intelligence in radiology. Radiologia. 2022;64(6):516-524. doi:10.1016/J.RXENG.2021.03.008
29.
YangYYShulrufB. Expert-led and artificial intelligence (AI) system-assisted tutoring course increase confidence of Chinese medical interns on suturing and ligature skills: prospective pilot study. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2019;16:7. doi:10.3352/JEEHP.2019.16.7
30.
FazlollahiAMBakhaidarMAlsayeghA, et al.Effect of artificial intelligence tutoring vs expert instruction on learning simulated surgical skills among medical students: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(2):e2149008. doi:10.1001/JAMANETWORKOPEN.2021.49008
31.
QianXJingyingHXianS, et al.The effectiveness of artificial intelligence-based automated grading and training system in education of manual detection of diabetic retinopathy. Front Public Health. 2022;10:1025271. doi:10.3389/FPUBH.2022.1025271
32.
ChenYWrennJXuH, et al.Automated assessment of medical students’ clinical exposures according to AAMC geriatric competencies. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2014;2014:375-384.
33.
KhumrinPRyanAJuddTVerspoorK. Diagnostic machine learning models for acute abdominal pain: towards an e-learning tool for medical students. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;245:447-451. doi:10.3233/978-1-61499-830-3-447
34.
NagarajMBNamaziBSankaranarayananGScottDJ. Developing artificial intelligence models for medical student suturing and knot-tying video-based assessment and coaching. Surg Endosc. 2023;37(1):402-411. doi:10.1007/S00464-022-09509-Y
35.
Alonso-SilverioGAPérez-EscamirosaFBruno-SanchezR, et al.Development of a laparoscopic box trainer based on open source hardware and artificial intelligence for objective assessment of surgical psychomotor skills. Surg Innov. 2018;25(4):380-388. doi:10.1177/1553350618777045
36.
MirchiNBissonnetteVYilmazRLedwosNWinkler-SchwartzADel MaestroRF. The virtual operative assistant: an explainable artificial intelligence tool for simulation-based training in surgery and medicine. PLoS One. 2020;15(2):e0229596. doi:10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0229596
37.
LedwosNMirchiNYilmazR, et al.Assessment of learning curves on a simulated neurosurgical task using metrics selected by artificial intelligence. J Neurosurg. 2022;137(4):1160-1171. doi:10.3171/2021.12.JNS211563
38.
BissonnetteVMirchiNLedwosNAlsidieriGWinkler-SchwartzADel MaestroRF. Artificial intelligence distinguishes surgical training levels in a virtual reality spinal task. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(23):e127. doi:10.2106/JBJS.18.01197
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
