ArticleJMIR medical education2023
Exploring the Possible Use of AI Chatbots in Public Health Education: Feasibility Study.
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 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- The impact of generative artificial intelligence on clinical skills and knowledge acquisition in medical undergraduates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Effect of using artificial intelligence chatbot about electronic fetal monitoring on maternity nursing students' performance.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Comparing AI chatbot simulation and peer role-play for OSCE preparation: a pilot randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Artificial Intelligence in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Evaluating large language models on multilingual vaccine knowledge: a benchmark study.NPJ vaccines · 2026Article
- Physician Perspectives on ChatGPT-4o as a Patient Resource for Abdominal Cancer Surgeries: Cross-Sectional Survey.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2026Article
- Empowering Informal Caregivers of Persons With Early-Stage Dementia by Large Language Models: Mixed Methods Evaluation.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Collaborative innovations and strategic directions in public health education: Insights from a round table discussion.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2026Review
- What and when: a Delphi study identifying AI competencies and learning objectives for medical students.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence Techniques and Health Literacy: A Systematic Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- The application and challenges of ChatGPT in laboratory medicine.Advances in laboratory medicine · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in undergraduate medical education: an updated scoping review.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Article
- Tracheostomy in the Digital Age: How Artificial Intelligence and Immersive Technologies Are Redefining Airway Care.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- Exploring medical students' intention to use of ChatGPT from a programming course: a grounded theory study in China.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Medical students and ChatGPT: analyzing attitudes, practices, and academic perceptions.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- ChatGPT and Other Large Language Models in Medical Education - Scoping Literature Review.Medical science educator · 2025Review
- Delving into the Practical Applications and Pitfalls of Large Language Models in Medical Education: Narrative Review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the feasibility of artificial intelligence models as patient information advisors for human papillomavirus vaccines.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) is a rapidly developing field with the potential to transform various aspects of health care and public health, including medical training. During the "Hygiene and Public Health" course for fifth-year medical students, a practical training session was conducted on vaccination using AI chatbots as an educational supportive tool. Before receiving specific training on vaccination, the students were given a web-based test extracted from the Italian National Medical Residency Test. After completing the test, a critical correction of each question was performed assisted by AI chatbots.
objectiveThe main aim of this study was to identify whether AI chatbots can be considered educational support tools for training in public health. The secondary objective was to assess the performance of different AI chatbots on complex multiple-choice medical questions in the Italian language.
methodsA test composed of 15 multiple-choice questions on vaccination was extracted from the Italian National Medical Residency Test using targeted keywords and administered to medical students via Google Forms and to different AI chatbot models (Bing Chat, ChatGPT, Chatsonic, Google Bard, and YouChat). The correction of the test was conducted in the classroom, focusing on the critical evaluation of the explanations provided by the chatbot. A Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to compare the performances of medical students and AI chatbots. Student feedback was collected anonymously at the end of the training experience.
resultsIn total, 36 medical students and 5 AI chatbot models completed the test. The students achieved an average score of 8.22 (SD 2.65) out of 15, while the AI chatbots scored an average of 12.22 (SD 2.77). The results indicated a statistically significant difference in performance between the 2 groups (U=49.5, P<.001), with a large effect size (r=0.69). When divided by question type (direct, scenario-based, and negative), significant differences were observed in direct (P<.001) and scenario-based (P<.001) questions, but not in negative questions (P=.48). The students reported a high level of satisfaction (7.9/10) with the educational experience, expressing a strong desire to repeat the experience (7.6/10).
conclusionsThis study demonstrated the efficacy of AI chatbots in answering complex medical questions related to vaccination and providing valuable educational support. Their performance significantly surpassed that of medical students in direct and scenario-based questions. The responsible and critical use of AI chatbots can enhance medical education, making it an essential aspect to integrate into the educational system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.