Artificial intelligence in medical education: a cross-sectional needs assessment

Creative Commons License

CİVANER M. M. , UNCU Y., Bulut F., Chalil E. G. , Tatli A.

BMC Medical Education, vol.22, no.1, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 22 Issue: 1
  • Publication Date: 2022
  • Doi Number: 10.1186/s12909-022-03852-3
  • Journal Name: BMC Medical Education
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Biotechnology Research Abstracts, CAB Abstracts, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Veterinary Science Database, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Keywords: Artificial intelligence, Healthcare, Medical curriculum, Medical ethics, Medical students, Medicine
  • Bursa Uludag University Affiliated: Yes


© 2022, The Author(s).Background: As the information age wanes, enabling the prevalence of the artificial intelligence age; expectations, responsibilities, and job definitions need to be redefined for those who provide services in healthcare. This study examined the perceptions of future physicians on the possible influences of artificial intelligence on medicine, and to determine the needs that might be helpful for curriculum restructuring. Methods: A cross-sectional multi-centre study was conducted among medical students country-wide, where 3018 medical students participated. The instrument of the study was an online survey that was designed and distributed via a web-based service. Results: Most of the medical students perceived artificial intelligence as an assistive technology that could facilitate physicians’ access to information (85.8%) and patients to healthcare (76.7%), and reduce errors (70.5%). However, half of the participants were worried about the possible reduction in the services of physicians, which could lead to unemployment (44.9%). Furthermore, it was agreed that using artificial intelligence in medicine could devalue the medical profession (58.6%), damage trust (45.5%), and negatively affect patient-physician relationships (42.7%). Moreover, nearly half of the participants affirmed that they could protect their professional confidentiality when using artificial intelligence applications (44.7%); whereas, 16.1% argued that artificial intelligence in medicine might cause violations of professional confidentiality. Of all the participants, only 6.0% stated that they were competent enough to inform patients about the features and risks of artificial intelligence. They further expressed that their educational gaps regarding their need for “knowledge and skills related to artificial intelligence applications” (96.2%), “applications for reducing medical errors” (95.8%), and “training to prevent and solve ethical problems that might arise as a result of using artificial intelligence applications” (93.8%). Conclusions: The participants expressed a need for an update on the medical curriculum, according to necessities in transforming healthcare driven by artificial intelligence. The update should revolve around equipping future physicians with the knowledge and skills to effectively use artificial intelligence applications and ensure that professional values and rights are protected.