The Advent of Generative Language Models in Medical Education

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and generative language models (GLMs) present significant opportunities for enhancing medical education, including the provision of realistic simulations, digital patients, personalized feedback, evaluation methods, and the elimination of language barriers. These advanced technologies can facilitate immersive learning environments and enhance medical students' educational outcomes. However, ensuring content quality, addressing biases, and managing ethical and legal concerns present obstacles. To mitigate these challenges, it is necessary to evaluate the accuracy and relevance of AI-generated content, address potential biases, and develop guidelines and policies governing the use of AI-generated content in medical education. Collaboration among educators, researchers, and practitioners is essential for developing best practices, guidelines, and transparent AI models that encourage the ethical and responsible use of GLMs and AI in medical education. By sharing information about the data used for training, obstacles encountered, and evaluation methods, developers can increase their credibility and trustworthiness within the medical community. In order to realize the full potential of AI and GLMs in medical education while mitigating potential risks and obstacles, ongoing research and interdisciplinary collaboration are necessary. By collaborating, medical professionals can ensure that these technologies are effectively and responsibly integrated, contributing to enhanced learning experiences and patient care.

A Survey of Clinicians' Views of the Utility of Large Language Models

“…Then, there were questions that prompted rating the appropriateness of LLM use for 23 different tasks in clinical practice, research and education on a 5-point Likert scale (i.e., highly appropriate to highly inappropriate). Those tasks represented a sample of proposed LLM uses that were synthesized form the literature and included, but were not limited to, optimizing alerts for clinical decision support, providing a differential diagnosis, writing a discharge summary, recommending treatment options, translating radiology reports into layperson language, writing scientific manuscripts, and generating personalized study plans for students or trainees among others 2,6,7,8,[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] .…”

Perspectives of ChatGPT in Pharmacology Education, and Research in Health Care: A Narrative Review

“…The chief executive officer (CEO) of OpenAI has noted that ChatGPT is not infallible and may not consistently deliver accurate information. 18,19,21…”

“…Moreover, AI tools have the capacity to actively involve students in academic activities. 21 Considering that manuscript writing is a time-intensive endeavor, ChatGPT proves to be beneficial for researchers engaged in scientific writing. Given the need for revisions and comprehensive research, ChatGPT offers pertinent information and references, assists in constructing sentences, correcting grammar, creating outlines, and streamlining the manuscript.…”

“…Moreover, it has facilitated improved communication among researchers, educators, and students. 21 Presently, AI is being employed in various educational domains, encompassing exam integrity, enriched online discussions, educational research, analysis of student success metrics, campus connectivity, lecture transcription, and tailoring student experiences based on their strengths and weaknesses. It facilitates universal access for all students, plagiarism detection, and scientific writing, and provides prompt and prospective feedback to students.…”

“…This is not dissimilar to utilizing altered images or committing plagiarism using existing data. 21 Addressing the ethical concerns encompassing transparency, biases, and plagiarism, H. Holden Thorp suggests that attributing authorship to ChatGPT is inappropriate, especially in journals that have adopted the International Committee of Medical Journal Editor criteria. Thorp recommends establishing a distinct section for "Non-Author Contributors," clearly acknowledging the contribution of ChatGPT.…”