ArticleFamily medicine2025
Using Artificial Intelligence in Clerkship Learner Assessment: A CERA Study.
Article in Family medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical education primarily has focused on clinical applications, with limited investigation into its role in learner assessment. This study explores AI usage among family medicine clerkship directors and their perspectives on AI's potential in competency-based medical education assessment.
methodsData were collected through the 2024 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance survey of family medicine clerkship directors. The survey was distributed from June four to July 12, 2024, to 173 directors, achieving a 52.6% (91/173) response rate. We used multivariable linear regression to analyze the relationship between AI usage and a composite favorability score for AI integration in student assessment, adjusting for covariates such as clerkship design and director tenure.
resultsAll respondents were physicians leading mandatory clerkships. Female and underrepresented minority directors were more likely to report no prior AI use. Multivariable analysis demonstrated a significant positive association between AI usage and favorability toward AI in learner assessment (coefficient: 2.601; 95% CI: 1.246-3.956; P<.001), even after adjusting for multiple comparisons. Feedback quality, organizational support, and policies did not significantly impact favorability.
conclusionsAI exposure was significantly associated with favorable attitudes toward AI in learner assessment, while organizational factors had no significant effect. Future studies with larger samples and longitudinal designs may clarify how institutional support and increasing AI exposure influence attitudes over time, informing best practices for AI adoption in medical 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.