ArticlePloS one2025
The ethical challenges in the integration of artificial intelligence and large language models in medical education: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Medical Students' Attitudes, Perceptions, and Self-Reported Familiarity With AI in Health Care: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JMIR medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Beyond social media: the era of generative AI and intelligent digital platforms in nephrology education.Renal failure · 2026Article
- Research Ethics Committees (RECs) perspectives on large language models and AI ethics review: a South African case.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Teaching AI ethics in medical schools: a scoping review protocol on the ethical-technical balance in curricular frameworks.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Acceptance and use of GenAI among medical and health sciences students in Saudi Arabia: an extended TAM study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Evaluation of ChatGPT-4o's and DeepSeek R1's responses to urological problems: a comparative study.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Developing a Large Language Model-Based Feedback System for Case Report Writing in Rehabilitation Education: Tutorial.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence driven transformation of pediatric eye health education based on bibliometric analysis and a cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Hotspot Evolution and Future Prospects of Large Language Models in Medical Education: A Bibliometric Analysis.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Cognitive reshaping and resurgence of humanness: restructuring the medical education continuum in the era of generative AI.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in emergency department triage: perspective of human professionals.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- From "teaching by word and deed" to "intelligent mentorship": ethical reconsiderations of AI-enabled medical education - lessons from China.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI), large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT have shown potential in medical education, offering personalized learning experiences. However, this integration raises ethical concerns, including privacy, autonomy, and transparency. This study employed a scoping review methodology, systematically searching relevant literature published between January 2010 and August 31, 2024, across three major databases: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Through rigorous screening, 50 articles which met inclusion criteria were ultimately selected from an initial pool of 1,192 records. During data processing, the Kimi AI tool was utilized to facilitate preliminary literature screening, extraction of key information, and construction of content frameworks. Data reliability was ensured through a stringent cross-verification process whereby two independent researchers validated all AI-generated content against original source materials. The study delineates ethical challenges and opportunities arising from the integration of AI and LLMs into medical education, identifying seven core ethical dimensions: privacy and data security, algorithmic bias, accountability attribution, fairness assurance, technological reliability, application dependency, and patient autonomy. Corresponding mitigation strategies were formulated for each challenge. Future research should prioritize establishing dedicated ethical frameworks and application guidelines for AI in medical education while maintaining sustained attention to the long-term ethical implications of these technologies in healthcare domains.
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.