ChatGPT versus expert feedback on clinical reasoning questions and their effect on learning: a randomized controlled trial

被引:2
|
作者
Cicek, Feray Ekin [1 ]
Ulker, Muserref [1 ]
Ozer, Menekse [1 ]
Kiyak, Yavuz Selim [2 ]
机构
[1] Gazi Univ, Fac Med, TR-06500 Ankara, Turkiye
[2] Gazi Univ, Fac Med, Dept Med Educ & Informat, TR-06500 Ankara, Turkiye
关键词
ChatGPT; large language models; artificial intelligence; feedback; clinical reasoning;
D O I
10.1093/postmj/qgae170
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose To evaluate the effectiveness of ChatGPT-generated feedback compared to expert-written feedback in improving clinical reasoning skills among first-year medical students. Methods This is a randomized controlled trial conducted at a single medical school and involved 129 first-year medical students who were randomly assigned to two groups. Both groups completed three formative tests with feedback on urinary tract infections (UTIs; uncomplicated, complicated, pyelonephritis) over five consecutive days as a spaced repetition, receiving either expert-written feedback (control, n = 65) or ChatGPT-generated feedback (experiment, n = 64). Clinical reasoning skills were assessed using Key-Features Questions (KFQs) immediately after the intervention and 10 days later. Students' critical approach to artificial intelligence (AI) was also measured before and after disclosing the AI involvement in feedback generation. Results There was no significant difference between the mean scores of the control (immediate: 78.5 +/- 20.6 delayed: 78.0 +/- 21.2) and experiment (immediate: 74.7 +/- 15.1, delayed: 76.0 +/- 14.5) groups in overall performance on Key-Features Questions (out of 120 points) immediately (P = .26) or after 10 days (P = .57), with small effect sizes. However, the control group outperformed the ChatGPT group in complicated urinary tract infection cases (P < .001). The experiment group showed a significantly higher critical approach to AI after disclosing, with medium-large effect sizes. Conclusions ChatGPT-generated feedback can be an effective alternative to expert feedback in improving clinical reasoning skills in medical students, particularly in resource-constrained settings with limited expert availability. However, AI-generated feedback may lack the nuance needed for more complex cases, emphasizing the need for expert review. Additionally, exposure to the drawbacks in AI-generated feedback can enhance students' critical approach towards AI-generated educational content. Key Messages What is already known on this topic Text-based virtual patients with feedback have shown effectiveness in improving clinical reasoning, and recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (AI), such as ChatGPT, have proposed new ways to provide feedback in medical education. However, the effect of AI-generated feedback has not been compared to expert-written feedback. What this study adds While the effect of ChatGPT feedback was generally on par with the effect of expert feedback, the study identified limitations in AI-generated explanations for more nuanced diagnosis and treatment. How this study might affect research, practice, or policy The findings suggest that ChatGPT can be utilized as a supplementary tool especially in resource-limited settings where expert feedback is not readily available. Its integration could streamline feedback and improve educational efficiency, but a hybrid approach is recommended to ensure accuracy, with educators reviewing AI-generated feedback.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Effect of Probiotics on Allergic Rhinitis: A Randomized, Controlled, Clinical Trial
    Sadeghi-Shabestari, Mahnaz
    Moghaddam, Yalda Jabbari
    Rezapoor, Hasan
    Sohrabpour, Mojataba
    GALEN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2020, 9
  • [32] Peer-assisted versus expert-assisted learning in virtual chest x-ray interpretation A randomized controlled trial
    Alsulmi, Mansour L.
    Alqarni, Muath M.
    Althaqfi, Anwar A.
    Bosy, Hattan H.
    Azher, Ruqayya A.
    Sabbagh, Marwan A.
    Bahakeem, Basem H.
    Tashkandi, Emad M.
    SAUDI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2022, 43 (02) : 202 - 207
  • [33] Effect of multisource feedback on resident communication skills and professionalism - A randomized controlled trial
    Brinkman, William B.
    Geraghty, Sheela R.
    Lanphear, Bruce P.
    Khoury, Jane C.
    Gonzalez del Rey, Javier A.
    DeWitt, Thomas G.
    Britto, Maria T.
    ARCHIVES OF PEDIATRICS & ADOLESCENT MEDICINE, 2007, 161 (01): : 44 - 49
  • [34] The effect of process and outcome feedback in highly distressed outpatients: A randomized controlled trial
    Bitan, Dana Tzur
    Kivity, Yogev
    Ganor, Ori
    Biran, Lior
    Grossman-Giron, Ariella
    Bloch, Yuval
    PSYCHOTHERAPY RESEARCH, 2020, 30 (03) : 325 - 336
  • [35] Effect of performance feedback on tracheal suctioning knowledge and skills: randomized controlled trial
    Day, Tina
    Iles, Nicola
    Griffiths, Peter
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2009, 65 (07) : 1423 - 1431
  • [36] Can leagues mitigate the demoralization effect of rank feedback? A randomized controlled trial
    Chen, J.
    Dobrescu, L. I.
    Foster, G.
    Motta, A.
    LABOUR ECONOMICS, 2024, 90
  • [37] Effect of expert-patient teaching on empathy in nursing students: a randomized controlled trial
    Ferri, Paola
    Rovesti, Sergio
    Padula, Maria Stella
    D'Amico, Roberto
    Di Lorenzo, Rosaria
    PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH AND BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT, 2019, 12 : 457 - 467
  • [38] The effect of smartphone-based monitoring and treatment including clinical feedback versus smartphone-based monitoring without clinical feedback in bipolar disorder: the SmartBipolar trial—a study protocol for a randomized controlled parallel-group trial
    Maria Faurholt-Jepsen
    Natacha Blauenfeldt Kyster
    Malene Schwarz Dyreholt
    Ellen Margrethe Christensen
    Pernille Bondo-Kozuch
    Anna Skovgaard Lerche
    Birte Smidt
    Ulla Knorr
    Kim Brøndmark
    Anne-Marie Bangsgaard Cardoso
    Anja Mathiesen
    Rene Sjælland
    Henrik Nørbak-Emig
    Lotte Linnemann Sponsor
    Darius Mardosas
    Ida Palmblad Sarauw-Nielsen
    Jens Drachmann Bukh
    Trine Vøgg Heller
    Mads Frost
    Nanna Iversen
    Jakob Eyvind Bardram
    Jonas Busk
    Maj Vinberg
    Lars Vedel Kessing
    Trials, 24
  • [39] Feedback microwave thermotherapy versus TURP for clinical BPH - A randomized controlled multicenter study
    Wagrell, L
    Schelin, S
    Nordling, J
    Richthoff, J
    Magnusson, B
    Schain, M
    Larson, T
    Boyle, E
    Duelund, J
    Kroyer, K
    Ageheim, H
    Mattiasson, A
    UROLOGY, 2002, 60 (02) : 292 - 299
  • [40] Teaching clinical reasoning to undergraduate medical students by illness script method: a randomized controlled trial
    Moghadami, Mana
    Amini, Mitra
    Moghadami, Mohsen
    Dalal, Bhavin
    Charlin, Bernard
    BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2021, 21 (01)