Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37279048›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2023

The Advent of Generative Language Models in Medical Education.

Mert Karabacak, Burak Berksu Ozkara, Konstantinos Margetis, Max Wintermark, Sotirios Bisdas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

79 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mert Karabacak *Department of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9263-9893
Burak Berksu Ozkara *Department of Neuroradiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8769-3342
Konstantinos MargetisDepartment of Neurosurgery, Mount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3715-8093
Max WintermarkDepartment of Neuroradiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6726-3951
Sotirios BisdasDepartment of Neuroradiology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9930-5549

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and generative language models (GLMs) present significant opportunities for enhancing medical education, including the provision of realistic simulations, digital patients, personalized feedback, evaluation methods, and the elimination of language barriers. These advanced technologies can facilitate immersive learning environments and enhance medical students' educational outcomes. However, ensuring content quality, addressing biases, and managing ethical and legal concerns present obstacles. To mitigate these challenges, it is necessary to evaluate the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated content, address potential biases, and develop guidelines and policies governing the use of AI-generated content in medical education. Collaboration among educators, researchers, and practitioners is essential for developing best practices, guidelines, and transparent AI models that encourage the ethical and responsible use of GLMs and AI in medical education. By sharing information about the data used for training, obstacles encountered, and evaluation methods, developers can increase their credibility and trustworthiness within the medical community. In order to realize the full potential of AI and GLMs in medical education while mitigating potential risks and obstacles, ongoing research and interdisciplinary collaboration are necessary. By collaborating, medical professionals can ensure that these technologies are effectively and responsibly integrated, contributing to enhanced learning experiences and patient care.

Indexed as

academic integrityAI-driven feedbackartificial intelligenceChatGPTevaluationgenerative language modellearning environmentmedical educationmedical studentstimulationtechnology

Identifiers

PMID37279048
PMCPMC10282912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.