ArticleJMIR medical education2026
Effectiveness of Informed AI Use on Clinical Competence of General Practitioners and Internists: Pre-Post Intervention 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.
- Self-Reported Knowledge, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Readiness Regarding AI Among Obstetrics and Gynecology Trainees: Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Mind the Gap: Challenges to Integration of Artificial Intelligence into Inflammatory Bowel Disease Care.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) shows promise in clinical diagnosis, treatment support, and health care efficiency. However, its adoption in real-world practice remains limited due to insufficient clinical validation and an unclear impact on practitioners' competence. Addressing these gaps is essential for effective, confident, and ethical integration of AI into modern health care settings.
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of informed AI use, following a tailored AI training course, on the performance of general practitioners (GPs) and internists in test-based clinical competence assessments and their attitudes toward clinical AI applications.
methodsA pre-post intervention study was conducted with 326 physicians from 39 countries. Participants completed a baseline test of clinical decision-making skills, covering diagnosis, treatment planning, and patient counseling; attended a 1.5-hour online training on effective AI use; and then took a similar postcourse test with AI assistance permitted (GPT-4.0). Test performance and time per question were compared before and after the training. Participants also rated AI accuracy, efficiency, perceived need for structured AI training, and their willingness to use AI in clinical practice before and after the course.
resultsThe average test scores improved from 56.9% (SD 15.7%) to 77.6% (SD 12.7%; P<.001), and the pass rate increased from 6.4% (21/326) to 58.6% (191/326), with larger gains observed among GPs and younger physicians. All skill domains (diagnosis, treatment planning, and patient counseling) improved significantly (all P<.001), while time taken to complete the test increased slightly from before to after the course (mean 40.25, SD 16.14 min vs 42.29, SD 14.02 min; P=.03). By the end of the intervention, physicians viewed AI more favorably, reporting increased confidence in its accuracy and time efficiency, greater appreciation for the need for structured AI training, and increased confidence and willingness to integrate AI into patient care.
conclusionsInformed use of AI, based on tailored training, was associated with higher performance in test-based clinical decision-making assessments and greater confidence in using AI among GPs and internists. Building on previous research that often lacked structured training, focused primarily on model performance, or was limited in clinical scope, this study provides empirical evidence of both competence and perceptual improvement following informed AI use in a large, multinational cohort, enhancing the generalizability. These findings support the integration of structured AI training into medical education and continuing professional development to improve clinical performance and promote competent use of AI in clinical practice.
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.