ArticleJMIR medical education2026
Evaluation of a Problem-Based Learning Program's Effect on Artificial Intelligence Ethics Among Japanese Medical Students: Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Standardized Patients: Conceptual Framework for Generative AI-Empowered Medical Education.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Current Landscape of Curriculum Development and Implementation in Medical Artificial Intelligence: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has had a substantial impact on medicine, necessitating the integration of AI education into medical school curricula. However, such integration remains limited. A key challenge is the discrepancy between medical students' positive perceptions of AI and their actual competencies, with research in Japan identifying specific gaps in the students' competencies in understanding regulations and discussing ethical issues.
objectiveThis study evaluates the effectiveness of an educational program designed to improve medical students' competencies in understanding legal and ethical AI-related issues. It addresses the following research questions: (1) Does this educational program improve students' knowledge of AI and its legal and ethical issues, and what is each program element's contribution to this knowledge? (2) How does this educational program qualitatively change medical students' thoughts on these issues from an abstract understanding to a concrete and structured thought process?
methodsThis mixed methods study used a single-group pretest and posttest framework involving 118 fourth-year medical students. The 1-day intervention comprised a lecture and problem-based learning (PBL) session centered on a clinical case. A 24-item multiple-choice questionnaire (MCQ) was administered at 3 time points (pretest, midtest, and posttest), and descriptive essays were collected before and after the intervention. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and text mining, including comparative frequency analysis and cooccurrence network analysis with Jaccard coefficients. An optional survey on student perceptions based on the attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction model was conducted (n=76, 64.4%).
resultsObjective knowledge scores increased significantly from the pretest (median 17, IQR 15-18) to posttest (median 19, IQR 17-21; β=1.42; P<.001). No significant difference was observed between score gains during the lecture and PBL phases (P=.54). Qualitative text analysis revealed the significant transformation of cooccurrence network structures (Jaccard coefficients 0.116 and 0.121) from fragmented clusters to integrated networks. Students also used professional and ethical terminology more frequently. For instance, use of the term "bias" in patient explanations increased from 10 (8.5%) at pretest to 25 (21.2%) at posttest, while references to "personal information" in physician precautions increased from 36 (30.5%) to 50 (42.4%). The optional survey indicated that students' confidence (mean 3.78, SD 0.87) was significantly lower than their perception of the program's relevance (mean 4.20, SD 0.71; P<.001).
conclusionsThis PBL-based program was associated with the improvements in knowledge and, more importantly, a structural transformation in students' thinking about AI ethics from an abstract level to a concrete, clinically grounded reasoning. The discrepancy between quantitative and qualitative findings suggests limitations of MCQs in assessing higher-order skills fostered by PBL. Overall, this study indicates the potential of PBL as an effective pedagogical method for AI ethics education.
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.