ArticleBMC medical education2025
AI-assisted diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma: educational needs and cognitive assessment based on the WHO classification 2022.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
This study explored medical students' perceptions, educational needs, and cognitive biases toward Artificial Intelligence-assisted (AI-assisted) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) diagnosis, using the World Health Organization (WHO) 2022 classification. A cross-sectional survey of 249 students examined their familiarity with AI tools, trust in AI-based pathology, and understanding of diagnostic criteria. While most students acknowledged AI's potential to boost diagnostic accuracy, especially for subtyping, over half voiced significant concerns about risks such as over-reliance and automation bias. A key finding was the knowledge gap around the WHO 2022 standards; urology students had a 66.7% self-reported awareness compared to just 7.7% among other majors' students. Nearly 70% of the participants called for mandatory AI training in curricula, with a focus on the rigorous clinical validation of AI tools, supported by over 70% of the pathology students. These results highlight the need to integrate AI innovations with stronger validation protocols and curricular updates to address challenges such as technical limitations, data standardization, and ethical issues. Future studies should align AI development with educational reforms and ethical frameworks to advance precise RCC diagnosis.
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.