Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40418795›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2025

Novel Blended Learning on Artificial Intelligence for Medical Students: Qualitative Interview Study.

Zoe S Oftring, Kim Deutsch, Daniel Tolks, Florian Jungmann, Sebastian Kuhn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

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

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  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

5 authors.

Zoe S Oftring *Institute for Digital Medicine, Philipps University Marburg and University Clinic Giessen & Marburg, Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg, 35042, Germany, 49 (0)6421 ext 58.ORCID 0000-0001-5473-2141
Kim Deutsch *Institute of Educational Science, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2642-8625
Daniel TolksInstitute of Anatomy, Rostock University Medical Centre, Rostock, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8597-5189
Florian JungmannXcare Group Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Radiotherapy, Saarlouis, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1561-5174
Sebastian KuhnInstitute for Digital Medicine, Philipps University Marburg and University Clinic Giessen & Marburg, Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg, 35042, Germany, 49 (0)6421 ext 58.ORCID 0000-0002-8031-2973

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are becoming increasingly relevant in everyday clinical practice, with Food and Drug Administration-approved AI solutions now available in many specialties. This development has far-reaching implications for doctors and the future medical profession, highlighting the need for both practicing physicians and medical students to acquire the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to effectively use and evaluate these technologies. Currently, however, there is limited experience with AI-focused curricular training and continuing education. Objective: This paper first introduces a novel blended learning curriculum including one module on AI for medical students in Germany. Second, this paper presents findings from a qualitative postcourse evaluation of students' knowledge and attitudes toward AI and their overall perception of the course. Methods: Clinical-year medical students can attend a 5-day elective course called "Medicine in the Digital Age," which includes one dedicated AI module alongside 4 others on digital doctor-patient communication; digital health applications and smart devices; telemedicine; and virtual/augmented reality and robotics. After course completion, participants were interviewed in semistructured small group interviews. The interview guide was developed deductively from existing evidence and research questions compiled by our group. A subset of interview questions focused on students' knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding medical AI, and their overall course assessment. Responses were analyzed using Mayring's qualitative content analysis. This paper reports on the subset of students' statements about their perception and attitudes toward AI and the elective's general evaluation. Results: We conducted a total of 18 group interviews, in which all 35 (100%) participants (female=11, male=24) from 3 consecutive course runs participated. This produced a total of 214 statements on AI, which were assigned to the 3 main categories "Areas of Application," "Future Work," and "Critical Reflection." The findings indicate that students have a nuanced and differentiated understanding of AI. Additionally, 610 statements concerned the elective's overall assessment, demonstrating great learning benefits and high levels of acceptance of the teaching concept. All 35 students would recommend the elective to peers. Conclusions: The evaluation demonstrated that the AI module effectively generates competences regarding AI technology, fosters a critical perspective, and prepares medical students to engage with the technology in a differentiated manner. The curriculum is feasible, beneficial, and highly accepted among students, suggesting it could serve as a teaching model for other medical institutions. Given the growing number and impact of medical AI applications, there is a pressing need for more AI-focused curricula and further research on their educational impact.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalCurriculumFemaleGermanyHumansInterviews as TopicMaleQualitative Researchartificial intelligencechatbotclinical AIdigital literacydigital transformationmedical curriculummedical educationmedical studentsmedical studiesqualitative content analysis

Identifiers

PMID40418795
PMCPMC12149464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.