Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is used in a variety of contexts in medicine. This involves the use of algorithms and software that analyze digital information to make diagnoses and suggest adapted therapies. It is unclear, however, what medical students know about AI in medicine, how they evaluate its application, and what they expect from their medical training accordingly. In the study presented here, we asked medical students about their assessment of AI in medicine and recorded their ideas and suggestions for considering this topic in medical education. Fifty-eight medical students took part in the survey. Almost all participants were aware of the use of AI in medicine and had an adequate understanding of it. They perceived AI in medicine to be reliable, trustworthy, and technically competent, but not particularly credible. They considered AI in medicine to be rather intelligent but not anthropomorphic. Participants were interested in the opportunities of AI in the medical context and wanted to learn more about it. They indicated that basic AI knowledge should be taught in medical studies, in particular, knowledge about modes of operation, ethics, areas of application, reliability, and possible risks. We discuss the implications of these findings for the curricular development in medical education. Medical students need to be equipped with the knowledge and skills to use AI effectively and ethically in their future practice. This includes understanding the limitations and potential biases of AI algorithms by teaching the sensible use of human oversight and continuous monitoring to catch errors in AI algorithms and ensure that final decisions are made by human clinicians.
Introduction
Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in the medical field. AI in medicine is an umbrella term that describes the use of algorithms and software that analyze data and digital information to make diagnoses and suggest therapies (Briganti and Le Moine 2020; Malik et al. 2019; Mintz and Brodie 2019). AI plays a role in imaging diagnostics, for example, in the evaluation of CT scans or skin images and many more (Haleem et al. 2019; Panayides et al. 2020). Doctors can be supported by decision-support systems to diagnose diseases. Other fields of application for AI in medicine are drug development and the personalization of treatments (Ahmad et al. 2021; Haleem et al. 2019). At the same time, however, not much is known about what prospective medical doctors know about AI and its application in medicine, how they assess this development, what they expect from their training in this respect, and what exactly they would like to see implemented in medical curricula.
Materials and methods
In an online questionnaire, we asked medical students about their understanding and assessment of AI in medicine and recorded their suggestions for considering this topic in medical education. The questionnaire was advertised in November 2022 via the e-mail distribution list of the medical student council of a German university. Students were provided with a link to access the survey. They participated voluntarily and gave written informed consent. Participation took about 10 minutes and was not compensated.
First, the questionnaire asked for participants’ awareness of AI in medicine and their understanding of AI in general. Then we provided a short neutral definition of AI in medicine to ensure all participants had a basic comprehension of the term. After that, we asked for the perceived reliability of AI (5 items), its perceived technical competence (5 items), and credibility (4 items) following Madsen and Gregor (2000), as well as the perceived trustworthiness of AI in medicine (Jian et al. 2000; 12 items) on 5-point Likert Scales ranging from 1= do not agree at all to 5= agree completely. We also captured the perceived intelligence (5 items) and anthropomorphism (4 items) on semantic differential scales ranging from 1-5 (Bartneck et al. 2009; Lermann Henestrosa et al 2023). Finally, we asked the participants to what extent basic AI knowledge should be provided in university courses and what specific aspects should be implemented in medical education.
Results
Eighty-four participants clicked on the link, but 26 dropped out before finishing the survey or indicated not being medical students. The remaining 58 participants (mean age = 24.51 years, SD = 3.56 years) replied to all questions. The vast majority of participants (94.83%) indicated that they were aware that AI was used in medicine, and they showed an adequate understanding of AI, referring in an open question to machine learning (48.28%), algorithms (58.62%), and neural networks (8.62%) as the most relevant aspects. As an application of AI in medicine, reference was made primarily to its use in diagnostics (86.21%) and surgeries (27.59%).
The participants perceived AI in medicine to be fairly reliable (M=3.30; SD=0.69), trustworthy (M=3.58; SD=0.71), and technically competent (M=3.26; SD=0.71), but not particularly credible (M=2.34; SD=0.71). Moreover, they perceived AI in medicine to be rather intelligent (M=3.75; SD=0.66), but not anthropomorphic (M=1.99; SD=0.64).
The participants indicated only to a moderate extent that they already had experience with AI (M=2.85; SD=1.41; on a 5-point scale), learned about AI in an educational context (M=2.67; SD=1.47), or experienced AI in a medical context (M=2.69; SD=1.43). There was a very high level of agreement, however, when asked whether they were interested in the possibilities of AI in the medical context (M=4.52; SD=0.71), would like to learn more about AI (M=4.38; SD=0.83), and would like to see AI addressed more extensively in medical teaching (M=4.17; SD=0.92).
Fifty participants (86.21%) agreed that basic AI knowledge should be taught in medical studies. In particular, they supported the teaching of knowledge about modes of operation (77.59%), ethics (75.86%), areas of application (75.86%), reliability (94.83%), and possible risks (89.66%). There was less support for teaching legal aspects (46.55%) and future developments (46.55%). Potential problems of AI in medicine that were pointed out by participants included ethical concerns (53.45%), lack of control (43.10%), and the potential lack of reliability of AI (34.48%).
Discussion
The findings of this study indicate that medical students are very interested in AI in medicine and want to learn more about it in medical school (see also Moldt et al. 2023). The interest of medical students in this topic is not surprising given the rapid advances in AI and its potential to revolutionize healthcare. Given the potential of AI in medicine, it appears to be important for medical schools to incorporate AI education into their curricula. Medical students need to be equipped with the knowledge and skills to use AI effectively and ethically in their future practice. This includes understanding the limitations and potential biases of AI algorithms. Potential risks of AI in medicine could be addressed by teaching the sensible use of human oversight and continuous monitoring to catch errors or biases in AI algorithms and ensure that final decisions are made by human clinicians. By taking these steps, medical education can ensure that AI in medicine is used effectively and safely to improve patient outcomes.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
Declaration of interest statement
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
The research reported here was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research and by budget resources of the Leibniz-Institut fuer Wissensmedien.
All of the participants made their data available voluntarily and data analysis was carried out on the basis of anonymized data. Participants gave written informed consent and were informed about privacy protection, their right to withdraw the data at any time without disadvantages, and about the general purpose of the study. The study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Leibniz-Institut fuer Wissensmedien (approval number: LEK 2022/048).