Pham Thai Duong, Karunaratne Nilushi, Exintaris Betty, Liu Danny, Lay Travis, Yuriev Elizabeth, Lim Angelina
Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education), The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
Med Educ. 2025 Jun 18. doi: 10.1111/medu.15746.
Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly integrated into health professions education (HPE), offering new opportunities for student learning. However, current research lacks a comprehensive understanding of how HPE students actually use GenAI in practice. Laurillard's Conversational Framework outlines six learning types-acquisition, inquiry, practice, production, discussion and collaboration-commonly used to categorise learning activities supported by conventional and digital technologies. Gaining insight into how GenAI aligns with these six learning types could assist HPE academics in integrating it more thoughtfully and effectively into teaching and learning.
This systematic review investigates how HPE students utilise GenAI and examines how these uses align with Laurillard's six learning types compared to conventional and digital technologies.
A systematic review searching five major databases-ERIC, Education Database, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Scopus including articles on HPE students' use of GenAI until 15th September 2024. Studies were included if they were conducted within formal HPE training programs in HPE and specifically mentioned how students interact with GenAI. Data were mapped to the six learning modes of the Laurillard's Framework. Study quality was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).
Thirty-three studies met inclusion criteria. GenAI supported learning most frequently in practice (73%), inquiry (70%), production (67%) and acquisition (55%). These studies highlight GenAI's varied educational applications, from clarifying complex concepts to simulating clinical scenarios and generating practice materials. Discussion and collaboration were less represented (12% each), suggesting a shift toward more individualised learning with GenAI. The findings highlight benefits such as efficiency and accessibility, alongside concerns about critical thinking, academic integrity and reduced peer interaction.
This review has provided insights into HPE students' learning aligned with Laurillard's existing six learning types. Although GenAI supports personalised and self-directed learning, its role in collaborative modes is under-explored.
生成式人工智能(GenAI)越来越多地融入健康职业教育(HPE),为学生学习提供了新机会。然而,目前的研究缺乏对HPE学生在实践中实际如何使用GenAI的全面理解。劳里尔的对话框架概述了六种学习类型——获取、探究、实践、产出、讨论和协作——通常用于对传统和数字技术支持的学习活动进行分类。深入了解GenAI如何与这六种学习类型相契合,有助于HPE学者更周全、有效地将其融入教学。
本系统评价调查HPE学生如何使用GenAI,并研究与传统和数字技术相比,这些使用方式如何与劳里尔的六种学习类型相契合。
进行系统评价,检索五个主要数据库——教育资源信息中心(ERIC)、教育数据库、Ovid医学数据库、Ovid Embase和Scopus,纳入截至2024年9月15日有关HPE学生使用GenAI的文章。如果研究是在HPE的正规培训项目中进行,且具体提及学生如何与GenAI互动,则纳入研究。数据被映射到劳里尔框架的六种学习模式。使用医学教育研究质量工具(MERSQI)评估研究质量。
33项研究符合纳入标准。GenAI在实践(73%)、探究(70%)、产出(67%)和获取(55%)方面对学习的支持最为频繁。这些研究突出了GenAI多样的教育应用,从阐释复杂概念到模拟临床场景以及生成实践材料。讨论和协作方面的体现较少(各占12%),表明使用GenAI的学习方式正朝着更个性化的方向转变。研究结果突出了效率和可及性等益处,同时也引发了对批判性思维、学术诚信和同伴互动减少的担忧。
本评价提供了与劳里尔现有的六种学习类型相关的HPE学生学习情况的见解。尽管GenAI支持个性化和自主学习,但其在协作模式中的作用仍有待深入探索。