CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationArtificial Intelligence in EducationInnovations in Medical Education

Perceptions of Faculty and Students About Use of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: A Qualitative Study

Open access
Salih, Sarah M·2024·Cureus
DOI 10.7759/cureus.57605PMC PMC11069392
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) implies using a computer to model intelligent behavior with minimal human intervention. With the advances of AI use in healthcare comes the need to reform medical education to produce doctors competent in AI use. Therefore, this qualitative study was conducted to explore faculty and students' perspectives on AI, their use of AI applications, and their perspective on its value and impact on medical education at a Saudi faculty of medicine. METHODS: This qualitative study was conducted at the Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University in Saudi Arabia. A direct interview was held with 11 faculty members, and six focus group discussions were conducted with students from the second to sixth year (34 students). Data were collected using semi-structured open-ended interview questions based on relevant literature. FINDINGS: Most respondents (91.11%) believed AI systems would positively impact medical education, especially in research, knowledge gain, assessment, and simulation. However, ethical concerns were raised about threats to academic integrity, plagiarism, privacy/confidentiality issues, and AI's lacking cultural sensitivity. Faculty and students felt a need for training on AI use (80%) and that the curriculum could adapt to integrate AI (64.44%), though resources were seen as currently needing to be improved. CONCLUSION: AI's potential to enhance medical education is generally viewed positively in the study, but ethical concerns must be addressed. Integrating AI into medical education programs requires adequate resources, training, and curriculum adaptation. There is still a need for further research in this area to develop comprehensive strategies.

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.57605

Cites

15 of 15 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?

  • GAI facilitated learning for medical students by enabling scenario generation and case simulation, providing rapid information, easy to use and explaining complex information.

    “This aligns with research indicating that GAI facilitated learning for medical students by enabling scenario generation and case simulation, providing rapid information, easy to use and explaining complex information [35].”

    From Generative artificial intelligence in physiotherapy education: great potential amidst challenges- a qualitative interview study (2025) · cites this paper as [35]

    The Results report respondents’ views that AI could help with scenario generation and case simulation, provide information, explain complex concepts, and save time through ease of use. The study reports perceived or potential benefits of AI generally, rather than demonstrating that generative AI facilitated students’ learning. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Literature searches located 7 survey research studies focusing on student or faculty AI perspectives.

    “Literature searches located 7 survey research studies focusing on student or faculty AI perspectives14–20; only three published AI training needs assessment studies were conducted in a U.S. medical school.15,19,21”

    From A Training Needs Analysis for AI and Generative AI in Medical Education: Perspectives of Faculty and Students (2025) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Abstract says the study examines faculty and students’ perspectives on AI. But Materials and methods identifies it as a qualitative case study using interviews and focus groups, not a survey study. This paper also cannot establish that the citing authors’ literature search found seven studies. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    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

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Salih, S. M.
Affiliations
Jazan University (SA)
Corresponding author
Salih, Sarah M
ORCID
Salih, Sarah M
Venue
Cureus
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2024-04-04
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
e57605-e57605
ISSN
2168-8184 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.7759/cureus.57605
PMC
PMC11069392
OpenAlex
W4393930585
Cited by
43
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 5
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Cureus (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 in medical education, teacher perceptions, student perceptions, AI ethics, academic integrity, plagiarism, privacy and confidentiality, cultural sensitivity, AI training needs, curriculum integration, simulation-based training, AI evaluation, medical education reform

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