Cited by 585Innovations in Medical EducationArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationHealth and Medical Education

Medical Education Must Move From the Information Age to the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Wartman, Steven A., Combs, C. Donald·2018·Academic Medicine

Abstract

Noteworthy changes coming to the practice of medicine require significant medical education reforms. While proposals for such reforms abound, they are insufficient because they do not adequately address the most fundamental change-the practice of medicine is rapidly transitioning from the information age to the age of artificial intelligence. Increasingly, future medical practice will be characterized by: the delivery of care wherever the patient happens to be; the provision of care by newly constituted health care teams; the use of a growing array of data from multiple sources and artificial intelligence applications; and the skillful management of the interface between medicine and machines. To be effective in this environment, physicians must work at the top of their license, have knowledge spanning the health professions and care continuum, effectively leverage data platforms, focus on analyzing outcomes and improving performance, and communicate the meaning of the probabilities generated by massive amounts of data to patients, given their unique human complexities. The authors believe that a "reboot" of medical education is required that makes better use of the findings of cognitive psychology and pays more attention to the alignment of humans and machines in education and practice. Medical education needs to move beyond the foundational biomedical and clinical sciences. Systematic curricular attention must focus on the organization of professional effort among health professionals, the use of intelligence tools involving large data sets, and machine learning and robots, all the while assuring the mastery of compassionate care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000002044

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • To date, there has been no published framework to guide teaching, learning, and assessing health care students and practitioners in the use of AI in health care.

    “While numerous authors have called for structured and intentional learning programs, to date, there has been no published framework to guide teaching, learning, and assessing health care students and practitioners in this emerging and transformative domain [7,9-12].”
  • Concerns about algorithmic opacity, reproducibility, and the "black-box" nature of clinical decision-support systems had already been accumulating in the medical AI literature throughout the late 2010s.

    “Concerns about algorithmic opacity, reproducibility, and the “black-box” nature of clinical decision-support systems had already been accumulating in the medical AI literature throughout the late 2010s [7, 11, 12]”
  • The risk is that a field can appear, by sheer publication volume, to be addressing responsible AI use while its actual citation-weighted center of gravity continues to reward technical demonstration over governance scholarship.

    “The risk is that a field can appear, by sheer publication volume, to be addressing responsible AI use while its actual citation-weighted center of gravity continues to reward technical demonstration over governance scholarship [11].”
  • AI in medical education raises concerns about reproducibility, transparency, necessity for protective oversight, and accuracy of produced content.

    “With the prominent reliance on secondary datasets that may contain systemic biases, concerns have been raised regarding reproducibility, transparency of generated content, necessity for protective oversight, and accuracy of produced content [7, 11].”
  • A limited number of articles have discussed or reviewed the current use of AI in medical education.

    “To our knowledge, thus far, a limited number of articles have discussed or reviewed the current use of AI in medical education.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wartman, S. A., & Combs, C. D.
Affiliations
Eastern Virginia Medical School (US)
Corresponding author
Wartman, Steven A.
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2018-08
Volume
93
Issue
8
Pages
1107-1109
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2766894906
Cited by
585
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 106 · 2025: 114 · 2024: 118 · 2023: 94 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 7 · 2013: 1
FWCI
16.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in healthcare, medical education reform, human-machine interaction, cognitive psychology, healthcare teams, data-driven medicine, machine learning, health professions education, compassionate care, physician role
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Clinical Competence, Cooperative Behavior, Education, Medical, Humans

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review