Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41553752›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2026

Uptake of Large Language Models by London Medical Students: Exploratory Qualitative Interview Study.

Maya Alazzawi, Kyle Lam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. 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

2 authors.

Maya AlazzawiDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7087-0445
Kyle LamDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6407-4912

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe popularity of large language models (LLMs) has grown exponentially across health care. Despite the wealth of literature on proposed applications in medical education, there remains a critical gap regarding their real-world use, benefits, and challenges as experienced by medical students themselves.

objectiveWe aimed to explore qualitatively and characterize the perceived benefits, facilitators, and barriers associated with the use of LLMs among a cohort of London-based medical students.

methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with 15 medical students from preclinical and clinical stages at London-based medical schools. Guided by the technology acceptance model, interview transcripts underwent an inductive thematic analysis to identify themes on actual system use, perceived usefulness, ease of use, and attitudes toward LLMs.

resultsAll participants reported frequent use of ChatGPT for concise topic summarization, clarification of complex concepts, generation of examination-style questions, and summarization of research. Students described LLMs as a complementary tool to traditional materials, valuing their immediacy ("Instead of getting a textbook, I can ask ChatGPT to summarise something in X words and read it in under a minute") and ease of use. Peer demonstration and device-agnostic accessibility emerged as key facilitators. Of note, wider applications such as simulating clinical interviews were discovered through peers rather than through formal teaching. Significant barriers were reported. Hallucinations, fabricated references, and outdated information led to loss of trust, with more junior students finding inaccurate outputs difficult to detect ("I stopped using it because I found it to be inaccurate, and I don't want to be learning the wrong things"). Half of the participants interviewed reported a sense of overreliance, defaulting to its use for answers with a perceived loss of critical thinking ability. Students noted inequalities in access to advanced features and voiced concerns about privacy when using LLMs in clinical scenarios.

conclusionsLLMs have been widely adopted by medical students. While students perceived the efficiency, flexibility, and conversational interface of LLMs as beneficial, substantial reservations remain regarding their reliability, potential de-skilling, and the loss of academic integrity. These findings underpin the urgent need for curricula to both support safe LLM use and also adapt assessment and teaching strategies for artificial intelligence-augmented student practice. Future research should broaden geographical representation, investigate applications in low-resource settings, and integrate educators' perspectives to establish future curricular guidance in an artificial intelligence era.

Indexed as

Large Language ModelsStudents, MedicalAdultFemaleGenerative Artificial IntelligenceHumansInterviews as TopicLondonMaleQualitative ResearchAIartificial intelligencegenerative artificial intelligencelarge language modelsundergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID41553752
PMCPMC12865347

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.