Knowledge, attitude, and practice of artificial intelligence among medical students in Sudan: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: In this cross-sectional study, the authors explored the knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to artificial intelligence (AI) among medical students in Sudan. With AI increasingly impacting healthcare, understanding its integration into medical education is crucial. This study aimed to assess the current state of AI awareness, perceptions, and practical experiences among medical students in Sudan. The authors aimed to evaluate the extent of AI familiarity among Sudanese medical students by examining their attitudes toward its application in medicine. Additionally, this study seeks to identify the factors influencing knowledge levels and explore the practical implementation of AI in the medical field. Method: tests, logistic regression, and correlations were analyzed using SPSS version 26.0. Results: Out of the 762 participants, the majority exhibited a basic understanding of AI, but detailed knowledge of its applications was limited. Positive attitudes toward the importance of AI in diagnosis, radiology, and pathology were prevalent. However, practical application of these methods was infrequent, with only a minority of the participants having hands-on experience. Factors influencing knowledge included the lack of a formal curriculum and gender disparities. Conclusion: This study highlights the need for comprehensive AI education in medical training programs in Sudan. While participants displayed positive attitudes, there was a notable gap in practical experience. Addressing these gaps through targeted educational interventions is crucial for preparing future healthcare professionals to navigate the evolving landscape of AI in medicine. Recommendations: Policy efforts should focus on integrating AI education into the medical curriculum to ensure readiness for the technological advancements shaping the future of healthcare.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".