Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39334022›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2024

Readiness, knowledge, and perception towards artificial intelligence of medical students at faculty of medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Indonesia: a cross sectional study.

Nata Pratama Hardjo Lugito, Cucunawangsih Cucunawangsih, Neneng Suryadinata, Andree Kurniawan, Rhendy Wijayanto, Veli Sungono, Mohammad Zuhriansyah Sabran, Nikolaus Albert, Claresta Janice Budianto, Kenza Yogasvara Rubismo and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

12 authors.

Nata Pratama Hardjo LugitoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia. nata.lugito@uph.edu.
Cucunawangsih CucunawangsihDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Neneng SuryadinataMedical Education Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Andree KurniawanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Rhendy WijayantoMedical Education Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Veli SungonoDepartment of Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Mohammad Zuhriansyah SabranStudent Organization for Science, Education, Clinical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Nikolaus AlbertStudent Organization for Science, Education, Clinical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Claresta Janice BudiantoStudent Organization for Science, Education, Clinical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Kenza Yogasvara RubismoStudent Organization for Science, Education, Clinical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Nyoman Bagus Satcitta Ananda PurushotamaStudent Organization for Science, Education, Clinical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.
Alfred ZebuaStudent Organization for Science, Education, Clinical Research, Evidence-Based Medicine, and Technology, Faculty of Medicine, Pelita Harapan University, Tangerang, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionArtificial intelligence (AI) enables machines to perform many complicated human skills which require various levels of human intelligence. In the field of medicine, AI helps physicians in making diagnoses and treatments for patients with more efficiency, accuracy, and precision. In order to prepare medical students who are the future healthcare workforce, it is important to enhance their readiness, knowledge and perception toward AI. This study aims to assess Pelita Harapan University (PHU) medical students' readiness, knowledge, and perception toward AI.

methodsA quantitative cross-sectional study was conducted to assess respondents' readiness, knowledge and perception toward AI. An online questionnaire was distributed via Google Forms to all batch of medical students. Medical Artificial Intelligence Readiness Scale for Medical Students (MAIRS-MS) questionnaire was used to evaluate AI readiness, while an adapted questionnaires was used to evaluate knowledge and perception toward AI. Data were then analyzed using IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23.0.

resultsA total of 650 respondents were included in this study. Most respondents were in pre-clinical phase (88%) while the remaining were in clinical phase (12%). Overall, the total mean score for AI readiness was 73.34 of 100. Respondents had a mean score 24.52 ± 5.26 of 40, 27.78 ± 4.65 of 40, 10.57 ± 2.07 of 15, and 10.47 ± 2.00 of 15 in the cognitive, ability, vision, and ethics domain respectively. Generally, respondents had sufficient knowledge and positive perception toward AI. There were also significant correlation between readiness and knowledge with gender, having studied coding previously in high school, and having family or close friends working in AI field. Social media also had a good influence on enchancing readiness in the domain of ability and ethics, and perception towards AI.

conclusionMedical students of PHU mostly showed neutral to favorable response on readiness, knowledge, and perception towards AI. Incorporating AI into high school and medical curriculum is an important step to prepare medical students' encounter and partnership with AI as the future workforce in medicine.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceStudents, MedicalAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansIndonesiaMaleSchools, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultArtificial intelligenceKnowledgeMedical studentsPerceptionReadiness

Identifiers

PMID39334022
PMCPMC11430330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.