Cited by 17Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in EducationInnovations in Medical Education

The role of artificial intelligence in Physical Therapy education

Open access
Lowe, Scott William·2024·Bulletin of Faculty of Physical Therapy

Abstract

Abstract Background and purpose Recently, there has been significant discussion about artificial intelligence (AI) and Large-Language Models (LLMs) as they relate to teaching and learning. To date, literature exists about the role of AI in Physical Therapy treatment, but not Physical Therapy education. This review will identify the benefits of adapting AI into Physical Therapy education to better prepare the healthcare providers of tomorrow. Rationale Survey research shows that AI can improve access to information, increase productivity, and reduce errors. However, most also feel ill-informed on the topic. A majority agreed that AI concepts should be included in Physical Therapy education. While valid concerns exist about AI sources giving false information, as well as the potential to use these services to plagiarize work, tools are already in existence to mitigate these issues. Potential benefits of AI in Physical Therapy education include the ability to produce examples, provide different explanations, and assist in assessing student learning while providing immediate feedback on performance. Discussion and conclusion With the scope of AI rapidly expanding, we believe it is imperative for Physical Therapy educators to have access to current information about its potential benefits, uses, and limitations. While many professionals do not currently possess much knowledge on the topic, there is a growing consensus as to the role it will play in our profession in the future. While discussions of AI can raise more questions than answers, preparation now will reduce the need for urgent adaptations in the future.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s43161-024-00177-8

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 13 · Cited by 17

Authors
Lowe, S. W.
Affiliations
Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Lowe, Scott William
Venue
Bulletin of Faculty of Physical Therapy
Published
2024-04-03
Volume
29
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1110-6611 (ISSN-L)
  • 2536-9660
OpenAlex
W4395483908
Cited by
17
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bulletin of Faculty of Physical Therapy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
artificial intelligence, large language models, physiotherapy education, AI in teaching and learning, student assessment, immediate feedback, plagiarism, misinformation, teacher readiness, curriculum adaptation

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