ArticleCureus2024
Assessing the Utilization of Large Language Model Chatbots for Educational Purposes by Medical Teachers: A Nationwide Survey From India.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- A scoping review of the use of generative artificial intelligence tools in health profession education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Evaluating the usefulness of ChatGPT and Gemini in generating educational content for patients with vitiligo: a comparative cross-sectional study.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly explored in healthcare and education. In medical education, they hold the potential to enhance learning by supporting personalized teaching, resource development, and student engagement. However, LLM use also raises concerns about ethics, accuracy, and reliance. Understanding how educators leverage LLMs can help assess their role and implications in medical education. Methods This cross-sectional online survey was conducted among medical teachers in India from December 2023 to March 2024. A validated questionnaire with acceptable internal consistency and test-retest reliability was used. It collected data on LLM chatbot usage patterns, as well as teachers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding LLMs for educational purposes. Results A total of 396 medical teachers with an average teaching experience of 4.12±2.47 (minimum six months, maximum 13 years) years participated from different parts of India. The majority of the teachers heard about ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco, CA, USA) (85%), followed by Copilot/Bing (Microsoft, Washington, DC, USA) (53%), and Gemini/Bard (Google, Mountain View, CA, USA) (45%) (p-value < 0.0001). However, 29% of the respondents never used it and 47% rarely use LLMs for educational purposes (p-value < 0.0001). The majority of the teachers use it for making any topic simple (55%), generating text for PowerPoint slides (55%), generating multiple-choice questions (MCQs) (52%), and finding answers to student's queries (35%). Knowledge (3.4±0.47) showed the highest score, followed by practice (3.3±0.81) and attitude (3.14±0.46) (p-value = 0.0023). Conclusion While awareness of LLMs was high among medical teachers in India, their actual usage for educational purposes remains limited. Despite recognizing the potential of LLMs for simplifying topics, generating teaching materials, and addressing student queries, a significant proportion of educators seldom integrate these technologies into their teaching practices. Institutions may provide training to help medical educators effectively integrate LLMs into teaching practices.
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.