MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389640894 · doi:10.2147/amep.s433255

Medicine and Pharmacy Students’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practice regarding Artificial Intelligence Programs: Jordan and West Bank of Palestine

2023· article· en· W4389640894 on OpenAlexaff
Rami Mosleh, Qais Jarrar, Yazun Jarrar, Mariam Tazkarji, Mohammad Hawash

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Medical Education and Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersAl-Balqa' Applied University
KeywordsPharmacyPalestineMedical educationFamily medicineMedicineConvictionAlternative medicineObservational studyPsychologyPolitical scienceInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) programs generate responses to input text, showcasing their innovative capabilities in education and demonstrating various potential benefits, particularly in the field of medical education. The current knowledge of health profession students about AI programs has still not been assessed in Jordan and the West Bank of Palestine (WBP). Aim: This study aimed to assess students’ awareness and practice of AI programs in medicine and pharmacy in Jordan and the WBP. Methods: This study was in the form of an observational, cross-sectional survey. A questionnaire was electronically distributed among students of medicine and pharmacy at An-Najah National University (WBP), Al-Isra University (Jordan), and Al-Balqa Applied University (Jordan). The questionnaire consisted of three main categories: sociodemographic characteristics of the participants, practice of AI programs, and perceptions of AI programs, including ChatGPT. Results: A total of 321 students responded to the distributed questionnaire, and 261 participants (81.3%) stated that they had heard about AI programs. In addition, 135 participants had used AI programs before (42.1%), while less than half the participants used them in their university studies (44.2%): for drug information (44.5%), homework (38.9%), and writing research articles (39.3%). There was significantly (48.3%, P < 0.005) more conviction in the use of AI programs for writing research articles among pharmacy students from Palestine compared to Jordan. Lastly, there was significantly more (53.8%, P < 0.05) AI program use among medicine students than pharmacy students. Conclusion: While most medicine and pharmacy students had heard about AI programs, only a small proportion of the participants had used them in their medical study. In addition, attitudes and practice related to AI programs in their education differs between medicine and pharmacy students and between WBP and Jordan. Keywords: artificial intelligence, education, Jordan, medical students, West Bank of Palestine

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.200
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Medical Education and PracticeSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207