Reimagining Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Undergraduate Medical Education in the Era of Artificial Intelligence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and its extensive potential for integration into many aspects of health care signal a transformational shift within the health care environment. In this context, medical education must evolve to ensure that medical trainees are adequately prepared to navigate the rapidly changing health care landscape. Medical education has moved toward a competency-based education paradigm, leading the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) to define a set of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) as its practical operational framework in undergraduate medical education. The AAMC's 13 core EPAs for entering residencies have been implemented with varying levels of success across medical schools. In this paper, we critically assess the existing core EPAs in the context of rapid AI integration in medicine. We identify EPAs that require refinement, redefinition, or comprehensive change to align with the emerging trends in health care. Moreover, this perspective proposes a set of "emerging" EPAs, informed by the changing landscape and capabilities presented by generative AI technologies. We provide a practical evaluation of the EPAs, alongside actionable recommendations on how medical education, viewed through the lens of the AAMC EPAs, can adapt and remain relevant amid rapid technological advancements. By leveraging the transformative potential of AI, we can reshape medical education to align with an AI-integrated future of medicine. This approach will help equip future health care professionals with technological competence and adaptive skills to meet the dynamic and evolving demands in health care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".