Cited by 71Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationInnovations in Medical EducationArtificial Intelligence in Education

Demystifying AI: Current State and Future Role in Medical Education Assessment

Turner, Laurah, Hashimoto, Daniel A, Vasisht, Shubha, Schaye, Verity·2024·Academic Medicine

Abstract

Medical education assessment faces multifaceted challenges, including data complexity, resource constraints, bias, feedback translation, and educational continuity. Traditional approaches often fail to adequately address these issues, creating stressful and inequitable learning environments. This article introduces the concept of precision education, a data-driven paradigm aimed at personalizing the educational experience for each learner. It explores how artificial intelligence (AI), including its subsets machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), can augment this model to tackle the inherent limitations of traditional assessment methods. AI can enable proactive data collection, offering consistent and objective assessments while reducing resource burdens. It has the potential to revolutionize not only competency assessment but also participatory interventions, such as personalized coaching and predictive analytics for at-risk trainees. The article also discusses key challenges and ethical considerations in integrating AI into medical education, such as algorithmic transparency, data privacy, and the potential for bias propagation. AI’s capacity to process large datasets and identify patterns allows for a more nuanced, individualized approach to medical education. It offers promising avenues not only to improve the efficiency of educational assessments but also to make them more equitable. However, the ethical and technical challenges must be diligently addressed. The article concludes that embracing AI in medical education assessment is a strategic move toward creating a more personalized, effective, and fair educational landscape. This necessitates collaborative, multidisciplinary research and ethical vigilance to ensure that the technology serves educational goals while upholding social justice and ethical integrity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0000000000005598

Cites

46 of 46 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Turner, L., Hashimoto, D. A., Vasisht, S., & Schaye, V.
Affiliations
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Turner, Laurah
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2023-12-28
Volume
99
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
S42-S47
ISSN
  • 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-808X
OpenAlex
W4390546628
Cited by
70
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1
FWCI
2.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence in medical education, medical education assessment, precision education, personalized learning, competency assessment, machine learning, deep learning, algorithmic bias, algorithmic transparency, data privacy, predictive analytics, personalized coaching, educational equity, AI ethics
MeSH terms
Mentoring, Artificial Intelligence, Education, Medical, Educational Measurement, Educational Status, 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