ArticleTransactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association2024
CLINICAL REASONING AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: CAN AI REALLY THINK?
Article in Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Large language models enhance diagnostic reasoning of medical students in rheumatology: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Ontological deskilling: clinical expertise and the changing disease object in precision medicine.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Article
- The Promises and Perils of Clinical Decision Support Artificial Intelligence.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
- Generative AI-Assisted Progressive-Disclosure Case-Based Learning for Clinical Reasoning in Occupational Medicine: Quasi-Experimental Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Educational Frameworks for Diagnostic Decision-Making in AI-Enhanced Head and Neck Pathology.Head and neck pathology · 2026Review
- The Long road to AI-physician partnership starts with learners: a map for AI in medical education.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Enhancing Critical Thinking or Undermining Cognitive Autonomy?Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Applications, Challenges, and Prospects of Generative Artificial Intelligence Empowering Medical Education: Scoping Review.JMIR medical education · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Endodontic Education: A Systematic Review with Frequentist and Bayesian Meta-Analysis of Student-Based Evidence.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Concept mapping to promote clinical reasoning in multimorbidity: a mixed methods study in undergraduate family medicine.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Comparing Artificial intelligence to physicians' competences in the domain of clinical reasoning: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) in the form of ChatGPT has rapidly attracted attention from physicians and medical educators. While it holds great promise for more routine medical tasks, may broaden one's differential diagnosis, and may be able to assist in the evaluation of images, such as radiographs and electrocardiograms, the technology is largely based on advanced algorithms akin to pattern recognition. One of the key questions raised in concert with these advances is: What does the growth of artificial intelligence mean for medical education, particularly the development of critical thinking and clinical reasoning? In this commentary, we will explore the elements of cognitive theory that underlie the ways in which physicians are taught to reason through a diagnostic case and compare hypothetico-deductive reasoning, often employing illness scripts, with inductive reasoning, which is based on a deeper understanding of mechanisms of health and disease. Issues of cognitive bias and their impact on diagnostic error will be examined. The constructs of routine and adaptive expertise will also be delineated. The application of artificial intelligence to diagnostic problem solving, along with concerns about racial and gender bias, will be delineated. Using several case examples, we will demonstrate the limitations of this technology and its potential pitfalls and outline the direction medical education may need to take in the years to come.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39135584PMC11316886What 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.