| Literature DB >> 32617320 |
Dongxuan Wu1, Yifan Xiang1, Xiaohang Wu1, Tongyong Yu1, Xiucheng Huang1, Yuxian Zou1, Zhenzhen Liu1, Haotian Lin1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) is an increasingly popular tool in medical investigations. However, AI's potential of aiding medical teaching has not been explored. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of AI-tutoring problem-based-learning (PBL) in ophthalmology clerkship and to assess the student evaluations of this module.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial-intelligence; ophthalmology clerkship; problem-based learning
Year: 2020 PMID: 32617320 PMCID: PMC7327320 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.12.15
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Transl Med ISSN: 2305-5839
Figure 1Flowchart of the study.
Seventeen-item questionnaire
| No. | Question |
|---|---|
| One-choice questions (A, strongly agree; B, agree; C, disagree; D, strongly disagree) | |
| 1 | AI-tutoring PBL helped me to acquire a higher level of knowledge |
| 2 | AI-tutoring PBL is more effective and motivate compared with traditional didactic lecture |
| 3 | AI-tutoring PBL challenged me to do my best |
| 4 | AI-tutoring PBL promoted the learning of essential concepts or skills |
| 5 | AI-tutoring PBL promoted effective cooperative learning |
| 6 | AI-tutoring PBL promoted increased reading of the textbook by the students |
| 7 | Overall, I am very satisfied with this AI-tutoring PBL |
| 8 | AI-tutoring PBL should be offered more frequently in the curriculum |
| 9 | I will recommend AI-tutoring PBL to other students |
| 10 | This activity was preferable to the traditional lecture format |
| 11 | The AI-tutoring PBL module is well organized |
| 12 | I study with colleagues frequently |
| 13 | The instructor highly facilitated the learning process during the process of AI-tutoring PBL. |
| 14 | The instructor responded well to questions asked by students. |
| 15 | The instructor encouraged and provided opportunities for discussion. |
| 16 | AI-tutoring PBL is beneficial to help develop critical and creative thinking. |
| Open-ended question | |
| 17 | Compared with the traditional teaching method, what do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of AI-tutoring PBL? |
AI, artificial intelligence; PBL, problem-based learning.
Baseline characteristics of subjects
| Characteristics | Group A | Group B | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male (n, %) | 7, 36.8% | 7, 36.8% | |
| Pre-lecture scores (mean ± SD) | |||
| Part I: diagnosis | 1.12±1.09 | 1.36±0.94 | 0.469 |
| Part II: treatment | 4.21±1.99 | 3.26±1.37 | 0.097 |
| Total scores | 5.33±1.90 | 4.62±0.98 | 0.158 |
SD, standard deviation.
Improvement of student performance in each group
| Test content | Difference in post- to pre-lecture scores (mean ± SD) | P value |
|---|---|---|
| Group A | ||
| Part I: diagnosis | 7.11±1.94 | 0.000* |
| Part II: treatment | 0.95±2.25 | 0.083 |
| Total scores | 8.06±2.86 | 0.000* |
| Group B | ||
| Part I: diagnosis | 5.39±2.26 | 0.000* |
| Part II: treatment | 1.37±2.11 | 0.011* |
| Total scores | 6.76±3.33 | 0.000* |
*, statistically significant. SD, standard deviation.
Comparison of student performance between Group A and B
| Test content | Group A (mean ± SD) | Group B (mean ± SD) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Post-lecture scores | |||
| Part I: diagnosis | 8.24±1.84 | 6.75±2.26 | 0.033* |
| Part II: treatment | 5.16±2.14 | 4.63±1.89 | 0.427 |
| Total scores | 13.39±2.40 | 11.38±3.17 | 0.034* |
| Increase in post- to pre-lecture scores | |||
| Part I: diagnosis | 7.11±1.94 | 5.39±2.26 | 0.016* |
| Part II: treatment | 0.95±2.25 | 1.37±2.11 | 0.556 |
| Total scores | 8.06±2.86 | 6.76±3.33 | 0.203 |
Figure 2Students’ responses to Artificial-tutoring problem-based learning courses. Each survey question used a four-point scale.