ArticleAcademic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry2026
Are Psychiatry Faculty Prepared to Guide AI Use? A National Survey.
Article in Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess psychiatry faculty knowledge, use, and perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) in undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME), and examine awareness of institutional AI policies.
methodsA national survey was distributed to psychiatry clerkship directors and residency program directors at 105 allopathic and osteopathic medical schools and 219 psychiatry residency programs across the USA from November 2024 to February 2025. The survey assessed AI use patterns, attitudes, perceptions, and awareness of institutional policies. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test for group comparisons.
resultsResponses were obtained from 31 UME faculty (29.5% response rate) and 46 GME faculty (21% response rate). All UME faculty and 74% of GME faculty believed students use AI. However, 36% of UME and 57% of GME faculty were unaware of institutional student AI policies. Knowledge of faculty AI policies was even more limited (38.7% UME, 63% GME uncertain). Only 35.5% of UME and 27.9% of GME faculty reported current AI use, primarily for research support, literature review, and content development. Overall, 50% of UME and 54.1% of GME respondents perceived AI in medical education as beneficial.
conclusionsDespite widespread belief that students use AI, psychiatry faculty demonstrate limited awareness of institutional policies and minimal integration of AI literacy in curricula. These findings highlight the urgent need for faculty development programs, clear institutional policies, and structured AI curricula to bridge the gap between rapid AI adoption by learners and educational infrastructure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42104022What 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.