Awareness and Attitude Toward Artificial Intelligence Among Medical Students and Pathology Trainees: Survey Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is set to shape the future of medical practice. The perspective and understanding of medical students are critical for guiding the development of educational curricula and training. Objective: This study aims to assess and compare medical AI-related attitudes among medical students in general medicine and in one of the visually oriented fields (pathology), along with illuminating their anticipated role of AI in the rapidly evolving landscape of AI-enhanced health care. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study that used a web-based survey composed of a closed-ended questionnaire. The survey addressed medical students at all educational levels across the 5 public medical schools, along with pathology residents in 4 residency programs in Jordan. Results: A total of 394 respondents participated (328 medical students and 66 pathology residents). The majority of respondents (272/394, 69%) were already aware of AI and deep learning in medicine, mainly relying on websites for information on AI, while only 14% (56/394) were aware of AI through medical schools. There was a statistically significant difference in awareness among respondents who consider themselves tech experts compared with those who do not (P=.03). More than half of the respondents believed that AI could be used to diagnose diseases automatically (213/394, 54.1% agreement), with medical students agreeing more than pathology residents (P=.04). However, more than one-third expressed fear about recent AI developments (167/394, 42.4% agreed). Two-thirds of respondents disagreed that their medical schools had educated them about AI and its potential use (261/394, 66.2% disagreed), while 46.2% (182/394) expressed interest in learning about AI in medicine. In terms of pathology-specific questions, 75.4% (297/394) agreed that AI could be used to identify pathologies in slide examinations automatically. There was a significant difference between medical students and pathology residents in their agreement (P=.001). Overall, medical students and pathology trainees had similar responses. Conclusions: AI education should be introduced into medical school curricula to improve medical students' understanding and attitudes. Students agreed that they need to learn about AI's applications, potential hazards, and legal and ethical implications. This is the first study to analyze medical students' views and awareness of AI in Jordan, as well as the first to include pathology residents' perspectives. The findings are consistent with earlier research internationally. In comparison with prior research, these attitudes are similar in low-income and industrialized countries, highlighting the need for a global strategy to introduce AI instruction to medical students everywhere in this era of rapidly expanding technology.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».