ArticleCureus2024
Medical Students' Perception Toward Using AI in Medical Education in the Kurdistan Region, Iraq: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitude, and perception of artificial intelligence among medical residents in Oman: readiness for clinical practice.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Awareness, attitudes, and educational use of artificial intelligence among medical students: a large cross-sectional survey.BMC medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aim AI is revolutionizing medical education by offering innovative tools and simulations that augment traditional teaching methods. This study explored the perceptions and expectations of medical students in the Kurdistan region, Iraq, regarding AI integration in medical education. Methods A cross-sectional online survey collected data from 224 medical students over four months. A descriptive analysis was conducted to present the student's attitudes. Results In total, 224 medical students responded to the online survey. The majority of them were female (n=129; 57.6%), while 95 were male (42.4%). Additionally, most of the participants were in stage 4 (54 (24.1%); stage 1, 48 (21.4%); and stage 2, 43 (19.2%). In terms of measuring students' perceptions of AI integration in medical education, 186 (83%) of the students wanted to use smartphones and tablets, and 38 (17%) of them reported wanting hard copies. In addition, 112 (50%) of the medical students considered themselves experts in using AI and 98 (43.8%) did not know exactly what AI was used; however, only a few of them (6.3%) did not use AI. Few patients reported using Manikins instead of real patients (42 (18.8%)), while 140 (62.5%) reported that they could be used but not an alternative. Conclusion While many agree that digital tools and simulations are useful teaching tools, they are frequently viewed as adjunctive approaches. Better integration and training are required for the infrequent use of AI tools in medical education.
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.