Tortella Fabio, Palese Alvisa, Turolla Andrea, Castellini Greta, Pillastrini Paolo, Landuzzi Maria Gabriella, Cook Chad, Galeoto Giovanni, Giovannico Giuseppe, Rodeghiero Lia, Gianola Silvia, Rossettini Giacomo
Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy.
Department of Medical Sciences, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Apr 18;25(1):572. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-07176-w.
BACKGROUND: Artificial Intelligence (AI) Chatbots (e.g., ChatGPT, Microsoft Bing, and Google Bard) can emulate human interaction and may support physiotherapy education. Despite growing interest, physiotherapy students' perspectives remain unexplored. This study investigated Italian physiotherapy students' knowledge, use, and perception of the benefits and limitations of AI Chatbots. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted through Survey Monkey from February to June 2024. One thousand five hundred and thirty-one physiotherapy students from 10 universities were involved. The survey consisted of 23 questions investigating: (a) respondent characteristics, (b) AI Chatbot knowledge and use, (c) perceived benefits, and (d) limitations. Multiple-choice and Likert-scale-based questions were adopted. Factors associated with knowledge, use, and perceptions of AI were explored using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 589 students (38%) that completed the survey, most were male (n = 317; 53.8%) with a mean age of 22 years (SD = 3.88). Nearly all (n = 561; 95.3%) had heard of AI Chatbots, but 53.7% (n = 316) never used these tools for academic purposes. Among users, learning support was the most common purpose (n = 187; 31.8%), while only 9.9% (n = 58) declared Chatbot use during internships. Students agreed that Chatbots have limitations in performing complex tasks and may generate inaccurate results (median = 3 out of 4). However, they neither agreed nor disagreed about Chatbots' impact on academic performance, emotional intelligence, bias, and fairness (median = 2 out of 4). The students agreed to identify the risk of misinformation as a primary barrier (median = 3 out of 4). In contrast, they neither agreed nor disagreed on content validity, plagiarism, privacy, and impacts on critical thinking and creativity (median = 2 out of 4). Young students had 11% more odds of being familiar with Chatbots than older students (OR = 0.89; 95%CI 0.84-0.95; p = < 0.01), whereas female students had 39% lesser odds than males to have used Chatbots for academic purposes (OR = 0.61; 95%CI 0.44-0.85; p = < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: While most students recognize the potential of AI Chatbots, they express caution about their use in academia. Targeted training for students and faculty, supported by institutional and national guidelines, could guarantee a responsible integration of these technologies into physiotherapy education. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.
背景:人工智能(AI)聊天机器人(如ChatGPT、微软必应和谷歌巴德)可以模拟人际互动,并可能支持物理治疗教育。尽管人们对此兴趣日益浓厚,但物理治疗专业学生的看法仍未得到探讨。本研究调查了意大利物理治疗专业学生对AI聊天机器人的了解、使用情况以及对其益处和局限性的看法。 方法:2024年2月至6月通过Survey Monkey进行了一项横断面研究。来自10所大学的1531名物理治疗专业学生参与其中。该调查包括23个问题,调查内容包括:(a)受访者特征;(b)AI聊天机器人的知识和使用情况;(c)感知到的益处;(d)局限性。采用了多项选择题和基于李克特量表的问题。使用逻辑回归模型探讨与AI的知识、使用和看法相关的因素。 结果:在完成调查的589名学生(38%)中,大多数为男性(n = 317;53.8%),平均年龄22岁(标准差 = 3.88)。几乎所有学生(n = 561;95.3%)都听说过AI聊天机器人,但53.7%(n = 316)从未将这些工具用于学术目的。在使用者中,学习支持是最常见的用途(n = 187;31.8%),而只有9.9%(n = 58)宣称在实习期间使用过聊天机器人。学生们一致认为聊天机器人在执行复杂任务方面存在局限性,可能会产生不准确的结果(中位数为4分中的3分)。然而,他们对聊天机器人对学业成绩、情商、偏见和公平性的影响既不认同也不反对(中位数为4分中的2分)。学生们一致认为将错误信息风险视为主要障碍(中位数为4分中的3分)。相比之下,他们对内容有效性、抄袭、隐私以及对批判性思维和创造力的影响既不认同也不反对(中位数为4分中的2分)。年轻学生熟悉聊天机器人的可能性比年长学生高11%(比值比 = 0.89;95%置信区间0.84 - 0.95;p = < 0.01),而女生将聊天机器人用于学术目的的可能性比男生低39%(比值比 = 0.61;95%置信区间0.44 - 0.85;p = < 0.01)。 结论:虽然大多数学生认识到AI聊天机器人的潜力,但他们对在学术界使用这些机器人表示谨慎。在机构和国家指南的支持下,针对学生和教师的定向培训可以确保将这些技术负责任地整合到物理治疗教育中。 试验注册:不适用。
JMIR Med Educ. 2023-11-1
BMC Med Educ. 2025-2-5
Front Public Health. 2024
J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2024-7-25