Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41124146›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

The ethical challenges in the integration of artificial intelligence and large language models in medical education: A scoping review.

Xinrui Li, Xiaodan Yan, Han Lai

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

3 authors.

Xinrui LiHospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Xiaodan YanHospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Han LaiChengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4610-2075

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Artificial IntelligenceEducation, MedicalLanguageComputer SecurityHumansLarge Language Models

Identifiers

PMID41124146
PMCPMC12543126

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.