Cited by 70Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence ApplicationsArtificial Intelligence in Education

The Emerging Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education, Research, and Practice

Open access
Shoja, Mohammadali M, Van de Ridder, J.M.Monica, Rajput, Vijay·2023·Cureus

Abstract

Recent breakthroughs in generative artificial intelligence (GAI) and the emergence of transformer-based large language models such as Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) have the potential to transform healthcare education, research, and clinical practice. This article examines the current trends in using GAI models in medicine, outlining their strengths and limitations. It is imperative to develop further consensus-based guidelines to govern the appropriate use of GAI, not only in medical education but also in research, scholarship, and clinical practice.

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 · 10.7759/cureus.40883

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • There is literature evidence for the potentially negative impact of ChatGPT on students' learning skills, particularly when the tool is used to generate essays or assignments that students submit without fully engaging in the educational process.

    “There is already literature evidence for the potentially negative impact of ChatGPT on students' learning skills, particularly when the tool is used to generate essays or assignments that students submit without fully engaging in the educational process [28].”

    From Health profession students' perceptions of ChatGPT in healthcare and education: insights from a mixed-methods study (2025) · cites this paper as [28]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [3]Is ChatGPT a good translator? A preliminary study ArXiv Preprints Jiao W Wang W Huang J 2023

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shoja, M. M., Van de Ridder, J. M. M., & Rajput, V.
Affiliations
Nova Southeastern University (US)
Corresponding author
Shoja, Mohammadali M
Venue
Cureus
Published
2023-06-24
Volume
15
Issue
6
Pages
e40883-e40883
ISSN
2168-8184 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4381997112
Cited by
69
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 7
FWCI
0.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Cureus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NSUWorks (Nova Southeastern University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Artificial Intelligence in Education
Keywords
generative AI, large language models, ChatGPT, medical education, medical research, clinical practice, AI guidelines, transformer models

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